Columbia  (Rsttoftrftp 

mtijeCttpofJJmtgork 


THE  LIBRARIES 


fat  €pcd)0  of  €!|titcl)  Qistatg 


€biteb  b|> 

3o!)n  fiilton,  JD.JD.,  ££.£) 


©oL  U. 


<£en  fepocfa  of  £#ure$  jgisfovg 


THE 
POST-APOSTOLIC    AGE 

BY 

LUCIUS  WATERMAN,  D.D. 

WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION 

BY 

HENRY  CODMAN  POTTER,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

BISHOP    OF   NEW   YORK 


CfaxkB  JlcttBtier'e  Jions 


MDCCCXCVIII 


•  * 

•  »  • 


t* 


Copyright,   1898 
By  Charles  Scribner's  Sons 


INTRODUCTION. 

The  demand  for  the  series  of  volumes  of  which 
this  is  one  is  an  interesting  witness  to  an  interest- 
ing and  significant  situation.  Church  histories  have 
been  hitherto  of  chief  if  not  of  exclusive  interest 
to  scholars  ;  and  even  within  this  narrow  circle  the 
demand  for  merely  ecclesiastical  histories  has  been 
narrower  still.  But  if  our  age  has  brought  nothing 
else  with  it,  it  has  brought  an  instinct  of  historic 
inquiry  which  has,  happily,  largely  freed  itself  from 
partisan  or  ecclesiastical  bias,  and  which  has  learned 
to  read  and  to  tell  the  story  of  the  Christian  cen- 
turies in  a  larger  spirit  and  with  a  more  candid  ut- 
terance. 

To  this  end  the  whole  tendency  of  modern  schol- 
arship, with  its  more  critical  and  more  independent 
methods,  has  happily  contributed ;  and  side  by  side 
with  the  growth  of  a  spirit  of  frank  and  fearless  in- 
quiry, there  has  grown  up  among  educated  people  a 
more  intelligent  judgment  of  historical  facts,  and 
more  hearty  appreciation  of  every  endeavor  to  as- 
certain them. 

It  is  in  such  a  temper  and  with  such  an  aim,  I 
venture  to  think,  that  the  following  pages  have 
been  written ;  and  I  believe  they  will  vindicate  the 
wisdom  and  accuracy  of  their  author's  method,  and 


278015 


vi  Introduction. 


his  sincere  and  candid  purpose  to  seek  and  to  tell 
the  truth. 

There  are  elements  in  the  situation  at  the  close 
of  the  nineteenth  century  which  would  seem  to 
make  them  opportune.  The  constant  enlargement 
or  the  area  of  our  knowledge  is  among  the  most 
important,  of  these.  The  curious  and  interesting 
history  of  the  discovery  of  Versions  of  the  Gospels 
has  its  analogy  in  kindred  discoveries  such  as  the 
*'  Teaching  of  the  Twelve,  "  which  have  both  wid- 
ened the  area  of  historic  fact  and  incident,  and 
confirmed  upon  a  surer  foundation  much  that  we 
already  knew.  In  addition  to  the  treasures  of 
Eusebius,  Tacitus  and  Suetonius,  of  Bingham,  Ne- 
ander,  Vitringa  and  Routh,  more  recent  scholarship 
has  enriched  us  with  the  work  of  Bunsen,  ScharT, 
Reuss,  Ritschl,  Lightfoot  and  Westcott ;  and  has 
made  the  task  of  the  student  who  would  write  the 
history  of  the  second  of  the  Christian  centuries  at 
once  more  interesting  and  less  difficult  by  bringing 
into  clearer  light  the  forces  and  influences  which, 
at  work  in  the  Apostolic  age,  projected  themselves 
with  such  irresistible  force  into  the  age  which  im- 
mediately followed  it. 

Again  ;  an  element  in  the  present  situation  which 
makes  such  a  work  as  this  a  timely  one  is  the  eman- 
cipation of  scholarship  from  the  domination  of  mere 
ecclesiasticism.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  a  good 
deal  of  Church  history  has  been  written  with  some- 
thing of  the  art  of  the  hired  advocate  ;  and  those 
traditions  of  indirectness,  of  suppression,  of  perver- 
sion, or  of  deliberate  mutilation,   which  have  been 


Introduction.  vii 


a  dominant  note  in  almost  all  Latin  methods  of 
dealing  with  the  history  of  Christianity,  and  espe- 
cially with  anything  that  concerned  the  claims  or 
authority  of  the  Church,  have  practically  vitiated 
the  worth  of  much  that  has  come  down  to  us  as 
Church  history.  No  better  sign  has  appeared  of  the 
dawn  of  a  new  era  than  the  change,  in  these  re- 
spects, in  the  methods  of  all  but  a  very  limited  and 
insignificant  group  of  Christian  scholars  ;  and  the 
growth  of  a  worthier  aim,  in  this  respect,  is  one  of 
the  most  cheering  signs  of  the  times. 

Still  another  aspect  of  our  better  learning  which 
makes  this  task  a  timely  one,  is  the  inter-relation 
and  mutual  inter-action,  in  the  progress  of  early 
Christianity,  of  forces  which  it  is  common  to  dis- 
tinguish as  respectively  sacred  or  secular,  upon  each 
other.  That  the  Christianity  of  the  second  century 
was  affected  by  the  civilization  of  the  second  cen- 
tury is  not  less  true  than  that  morals  and  con- 
duct between  A.  D.  100  and  A.  D.  200  were  in- 
fluenced by  the  life  and  teaching  of  Jesus  Christ. 
The  proportions  in  each  case  were  undoubtedly 
enormously  different ;  but  Athens  and  Rome  made 
themselves  felt  in  the  unfolding  of  the  new  religion, 
even  as  the  new  religion  thrilled  and  transformed 
those  to  whom  it  came.  To  trace  this  mutual  in- 
ter-action, and  to  recognize  its  consequences  is  one 
of  the  tasks  which  it  has  been  reserved  for  our 
time  adequately  to  perform.  It  will  constrain  us  to 
readjust,  it  may  be,  our  estimates  both  of  men  and 
of  events ;  and  best  of  all,  it  will  chasten  our  often 
extravagant  estimates  whether  of  the  acts  of  indi- 


viii  Introduction. 


viduals  or  of  the  decrees  of  ecclesiastical  councils,  to 
a  degree  which  cannot  but  issue  in  the  triumph  of 
truth  over  ignorance,  prejudice  and  partisanship. 

Best  of  all,  a  history  of  the  earlier  ages  of  the 
Church's  life  written  in  such  a  spirit  and  with  such 
advantages  as  I  have  indicated,  cannot  but  contrib- 
ute to  the  restoration  of  its  essential  unity  upon 
the  basis  of  essential  facts.  The  enormous  audac- 
ity which  in  our  generation  has  added  new  dog- 
mas to  the  historic  creeds  of  Christendom,  and  the 
very  novel  claims  of  authority  under  which  this  has 
been  done,  have  awakened  a  far  wider  challenge  of 
Ultramontanism,  even  among  its  own  followers,  than 
its  leaders  have  been  willing  to  recognize.  These 
cite  it  before  the  bar  of  history,  and  to  that  bar  it 
must  go. 

Nor,  as  de  Pressense  has  reminded  us,  has  the 
subject  a  lesser  interest  for  those  who  disown  the 
claims  of  the  "  Roman  Obedience.  "  "  Before  them 
also  there  are  serious  questions  for  solution  both  in 
the  domain  of  theology  and  in  that  of  the  Church. 
There  is  not  a  single  religious  party  which  does  not 
feel  the  need  either  of  confirmation  or  of  transfor- 
mation. All  the  Churches  born  of  the  great  move- 
ment of  the  sixteenth  century  are  passing  through 
a  time  of  crisis.  They  are  all  asking  themselves, 
though  from  various  standpoints,  whether  the  Ref- 
ormation does  not  need  to  be  continued  and  devel- 
oped. Aspiration  toward  the  Church  of  the  future 
is  becoming  more  general,  more  ardent.  But  for  all 
who  admit  the  divine  origin  of  Christianity  the 
Church  of  the  future  has  its  type  and  its  ideal  in 


Introduction.  ix 


that  great  past  which  goes  back  not  three,  but 
eighteen  centuries.  To  cultivate  a  growing  knowl- 
edge of  this,  in  order  to  attain  to  a  growing  con- 
formity to  it,  is  the  task  of  the  Church  of  to-day.  "  1 

Toward  the  accomplishment  of  that  task,  I  ven- 
ture to  believe,  the  work  of  my  friend  the  author  of 
this  volume  will  not  unworthily  contribute. 

Henry  C.  Potter. 

Diocesan  House, 

New  York,  July,  1898. 

1  De  Presseiise.     The  Apostolic  Age,  p.  9. 


AUTHOR'S   PREFACE. 

When  I  told  a  thoughtful  man  in  my  congrega- 
tion that  I  was  going  to  write  a  book  of  Church 
History,  his  answer  was,  "  Then  I  hope  you'll  make 
it  interesting."  I  am  sorry  to  acid  that  he  uttered 
that  word  of  hope  in  an  unhopeful  tone  of  voice. 
My  friend  ha3  seemed  to  be  interested  in  my  preach- 
ing. He  did  not  think  it  likely  that  he  could  be 
moved  to  any  interest  in  any  history  of  the  Church. 
My  mind  has  gone  back  to  that  incident  many  times. 
What  a  gain  it  would  be,  if  we  could  get  Christian 
men  generally  to  think  of  the  Church  here  on  earth 
as  the  Mystical  Body  of  our  Lord,  in  which  He 
dwells  and  works,  and  joys  and  suffers,  and  thus  to 
learn  to  read  with  sympathetic  interest  the  story  of 
the  fortunes  and  misfortunes  of  that  Body,  the 
training,  through  virtues  and  faults,  of  that  Bride 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  preparing  for  Himself ! 

I  have  had  in  mind  also  a  certain  "  Ladies'  His- 
torical Club  "  well  known  to  me,  made  up  of  women, 
intelligent  and  studious,  who  inform  themselves  with 
honest  ambition  and  hard  work  in  the  history  of 
England  and  America,  but  feel  no  shame  that  they 
know  almost  nothing  of  the  history  of  the  Church, 
and  that  what  they  do  know  they  generally  know 
wrong.  They  think,  for  instance,  of  "  the  Catholic 
Church "  as  a  corrupt  outgrowth  from  original 
Christianity,  with  a  "  Pope  "  at  the  head  of  it,  and 

xi 


xii  Preface. 


of  the  early  bishops  of  Rome  as  "  Popes,"  which 
last  is  exactly  as  unhistorical  as  it  would  be  to  call 
Queen  Elizabeth  ''Empress  of  India."  Surely  the 
Kingdom  of  God  has  influenced  the  development  of 
humanity  more  profoundly  than  even  the  British 
Empire.  Christian  history  is  quite  as  necessary  to 
education  as  English  history.  I  make  bold  to  say, 
therefore,  that  in  Chapter  II.  of  this  book  I  have 
had  such  "  Clubs  "  particularly  in  mind.  They  do 
not  as  a  rule  read  Greek,  but  they  do  read  original 
authorities  in  good  translations,  rather  than  know 
nothing  of  original  authorities  at  all.  If  such 
organizations  could  be  induced  to  put  Church  His- 
tory into  their  programmes,  they  would  read  (in 
translation  at  least)  Barnabas  and  the  Teaching, 
Clement,  Hermas,  Ignatius,  and  Polycarp.  They 
would  read  books  on  both  sides  of  some  of  the  great 
historical  controversies,  and  gradually  make  up  their 
own  minds.  Then  whichever  way  they  settled  their 
convictions,  I  should  never  say  again  that  what  they 
knew,  they  knew  wrong,  for  whether  their  opinions 
were  mine,  or  the  opposite  of  mine,  they  would  be 
worthy  of  respect. 

A  reviewer  in  the  London  "  Guardian"  has  twice 
suggested  lately  that  a  historian's  business  is  to  un- 
roll his  facts  like  the  pictures  of  a  panorama, — so,  at 
least  I  have  understood  the  criticism, — and  not  come 
before  the  curtain  to  lecture  on  them.  This  advice 
I  have  wished  to  lay  to  heart.  Yet  there  are  persons 
who  are  so  little  accustomed  to  visiting  panoramas 
of  this  kind  that  the  movements  of  the  figures  would 
be  unintelligible,  and  so  uninteresting,  to  them,  un- 


Preface.  xiii 

less  some  one  came  forward  to  explain  a  little  here 
and  there.  If  I  have  put  my  own  views  of  the  his- 
tory before  the  history  itself  more  than  the  interests 
of  the  audience  that  I  had  in  my  eye  required,  it  is 
a  crime  of  which  I  hope  that  I  may  live  to  repent. 

For  those  readers,  in  particular,  who  have  never 
trodden  this  way  before,  I  have  tried  to  be  an  honest 
guide,  fairly  indicating  to  them  the  places  where  an- 
other might  guide  them  altogether  different^.  At 
least,  I  have  taken  special  pains  to  point  this  out  in 
dealing  with  the  origins  of  the  Christian  Ministry. 
In  every  historical  study  different  men  are  found 
taking  different  views.  In  the  latter  part  of  this 
volume  there  seemed  to  be  much  less  need  of  re- 
minder concerning  such  differences  than  in  the 
earlier. 

A  few  additional  suggestions  may  be  made  here. 
(1)  A  critical  friend  thinks  the  note  on  p.  79  wholly 
unfair  to  a  distinguished  scholar,  "as  most  unrepre- 
sentative of  the  average  cogency  of  his  argumenta- 
tion." My  critic  is  a  man  better  entitled  to  be  heard 
than  I  am.  Therefore  I  give  his  view,  as  it  is  a 
question  of  fairness  to  a  person.  I  should  not  have 
written  the  note,  if  I  had  not  felt  deeply — and  I  feel 
still— that  the  book  in  question  is  a  vicious  example 
of  what  I  venture  to  call  "  the  unhistorical  imagina- 
tion," all  the  way  through.  (2)  A  note  on  p.  27 
requires  correction.  The  Fathers  sometimes  speak 
of  a  Divine  Table,  where  they  have  in  mind  the 
sacramental  provision  and  not  at  all  a  material 
structure ;  but  I  have  noted  two  more  quotations, 
one    from     Origen,    and    one    additional    one    from 


xiv  Preface. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  where  "  Divine  Table  "  or 
"  Holy  Table  "  seems  to  be  plainly  used  of  the  Altar 
in  a  Christian  Church.  (3)  In  Chapter  X.  a  refer- 
ence should  have  been  given  to  a  book  which  I  have 
found  valuable,  though  I  cannot  always  follow  it, 
The  Christian  Platonists  of  Alexandria,  by  Rev. 
Charles  Bigg,  being  the  Bampton  Lectures  for  1886. 
Apart  from  the  fact  that  no  student  can  ever 
write  a  history  that  all  other  students  will  agree 
with  in  detail,  I  dare  not  hope  that  I  have  accom- 
plished my  task  without  some  inaccuracies,  whether 
of  ignorance  or  of  carelessness,  which  would  be 
obvious  even  to  myself,  if  pointed  out.  It  would  be 
a  singular  favor  to  me  if  any  reader  who  detects 
such  would  kindly  give  me  the  benefit  of  his  fuller 
knowledge.  And  still  more  I  should  be  glad  to 
know  it,  if  ever  any  one  should  find  help  or  value  in 
this  volume  which  should  make  him  think  of  the 
author  as  a  friend. 

Lucius  Waterman. 
Laconia,  N.  H.,  Sept.  /,  1898. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

CHAP.  I.— The  Character  and  Boundaries  of  the 
Post-Apostolic  Age — Its  Beginning — Its  Terminal 
Point.— The  Chief  Difficulties.— When  Corruption  En- 
tered.— Its  Special  Purity 1 

CHAP.  II.— Sources  of  History  for  the  Beginnings  of 
the  Post- Apostolic  Age. — The  Purpose  of  Eusebius. — 
Qualifications  of  Eusebius. — The  Letter  of  Barnabas. — 
The  Anti-Jewish  Party. — Barnabas's  Allegorism. — The 
Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles.— A  Eucharistic  Frag- 
ment.— Jewish  Tone  of  Didache. — St.  Clement  not  the 
Consul.— Was  St.  Clement  a  Bishop ?— Does  3  St.  John 
Refer  to  this  Quarrel? — Qualities  of  St.  Clement's  Letter. 
— St.  Clement's  Three  Characteristics. — The  Shepherd  of 
Hennas.—  The  Prophets  of  the  First  Days.— Hermas,  the 
Brother  of  Pius.— Ignatius  of  Antioch.— Date  of  Ignatius. 
— His  Character. — Ignatian  Phrases  and  Figures. — A 
Medical  Man  and  Musical. — The  Passion  for  Unity. — 
Mutual  Duties  of  Bishop  and  Church. — Lost  Writings 
of  Papias 13 

CHAP.  III.— The  Historic  Episcopate— Rival  Theo- 
ries in  Modern  Times. — Opinion  in  Third  Century. — 
Apostles  Numerous  in  New  Testament. — Protestant 
Feeling  about  Episcopacy. — Apostles  Chosen  as  Eye-wit- 
nesses.— Grounds  for  the  Non-Episcopalian  View. — New 
Forms  of  Non-Episcopalian  View. — Theory  of  Dr.  Hatch. 
— Theory  of  M.  Reville. — Presbyters  not  Bishops  at  all. 
— Dr.  McGiffert's  View. — Acts  and  Pastoral  Epistles 
Forgeries 61 

CHAP.  IV. — The  Historic  Episcopate — The  Witnesses 
Called. — Eusebian  Lists  of  Early  Bishops. — Apostles  in 
the  Didache. — Prophets  called  Chief  Priests. — St. 
Clement's  Ambiguity. — A  Bishop  Offers  Sacrifice. — 
High-priests,  Priests,  and  Levites  Now. — In  the  Mind 
of  Jesus  Christ. — Presbyters  Called  Successors  of  Apos- 
tles.— Apart  from  These,  No  Church 85 

Chap.  V. — The  Church  and  the  Empire — I.  Persecu- 
tions and  Apologists,  to  the  Death  of  St.  Poly- 
carp. — Causes   of  Dislike   for    Christians. — Witchcraft 

XV 


xvl  Contents. 


PAGE 

and  Immorality  Charged. — The  State  Jealous  of  a  Higher 
Law. — Causes  of  Danger  to  Christians. — First  Account  of 
Christian  Worship. — The  Decision  of  Trajan. — An  Age  of 
Apologists. — Quadratus  Historical,  not  Metaphysical. — 
Story  of  Barlaam  and  Josaphat. — Aristides  not  in 
Bondage  to  the  Letter.— The  Character  of  Christians. — 
The  Rescript  of  Hadriau. — Severity  of  the  Autonines. — 
The  Faith  not  Changed  in  Transmission. — Let  Search  be 
Made  for  Polycarp  ! — Points  of  Likeness  to  the  Lord's 
Death.— The  Death  of  St.  Polycarp 105 

CHAP.  VI. — The  Church  and  the  Empire — II.  Perse- 
cutions and  Apologists,  from  the  Death  of  St. 
Polycarp  to  the  Accession  of  Commodus. — Justin 
Finds  a  Better  Philosophy. — Christians  not  to  be  Con- 
demned for  a  Name. — Justin's  Argument  Continued.— 
How  Christians  Were  Regenerated. — The  Food  called  a 
Eucharist. — The  Regular  Sunday  Morning  Service. — An 
Example  of  Roman  Justice. — The  First  Christian  Book 
in  the  Latin  Tongue. — A  Roman's  View  of  Martyrdom. 
— Apologies  Become  Numerous. — The  Persecution  of 
Lyons  and  Vienne. — Vettius  Becomes  a  Paraclete  of  the 
Christians. — Martyrdom  is  Witness-Bearing. — Christian 
Endurance  a  Puzzle  to  the  Heathen. — Signs  Following 
Them  That  Believe. — Persecution  Followed  by  Reaction,  141 

CHAP.  VII.— The  Church's  Rivals— Ebionism  and 
Gnosticism. — Ebionism,  the  Jews'  Distortion  of  Chris- 
tianity.— The  Nazarenes. — The  Pharisaic  Ebionites. — A 
Heretic  Does  Great  Service  as  a  Translator. — The  Original 
Essene  Society. — Departures  of  Essenic  Ebionism  from 
'Essenism. — Danger  that  Men  Will  Look  for  Grace  Irre- 
sistible.—  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Story. — Ebionite 
Warnings  Against  a  False  Apostle. — Effect  of  the  For- 
geries on  Public  Opinion. — Rationalism  vs.  Traditional- 
ism.—The  Creator  of  the  World  not  the  True  God.— The 
Gnostic  View  of  iEons. — Gnostic  Contrast  of  Pneumatic 
and  Psychic. — Nicolas  the  Deacon. — Marcion  of  Pontus. 
— Lesson  of  Gnosticism  for  Nineteenth  Century   ....    175 

CHAP.  VIII. — Three  Interior  Strifes — The  Paschal 
Question — Montanism — Sabellianism. — The  Quar- 
todeciman  Controversy. — Our  Easter  Rule  not  Apostolic. 
— Polycarp  and  Anicetus  Agree  to  Differ. — The  Testimony 
of  Claudius  Apolinarius. — Another  Fragment  from 
Claudius. — Directions  from  Rome  not  Binding. — Victor's 
Attempt  at  Wholesale  Excommunication. — Festal  Epis- 
tles Sent  from  Alexandria. — Characteristics  of  the  Phry- 
gians.— Prophesy ings  Attractive  to  the  Phrygian  Tem- 
per.— Was  the  Christian  Revelation  Final  ?— The  Pro- 
phesyings  Ascribed  to  Evil  Spirits. — Montanist  Leaders 
Appeal  for  Recognition. — The  Partial  Successes  of  Mon- 


Contents.  xvii 


PAGE 

tanism. — The  First  Martyrs  of  North  Africa. — The  First 
Vision  of  Perpetua. — Perpetua's  Vision  of  the  Unsaved 
Soul. — Saturus's  Vision  of  Paradise. — Montanists  not  yet 
Separated  from  the  Church. — Martyrs  Triumph  over  Pain 
and  Fear. — A  Wise  Bishop  May  Be  More  than  a  Constant 
Martyr. — Meaning  of  Name  Monarchianism. — Heretical 
View  of  a  Modal  Trinity. — Noetus  Introduces  Monarch- 
ianism at  Rome. — Roman  Authorities  Led  Astray  by 
Praxeas 208 

CHAP.  IX.— Early  Theologians  of  the  West— Ire 
n,eus — Tertullian — Hippolytus— Irenseus,  the  Con- 
servative and  Peace-Maker. — The  Book  Against  All 
Heresies. — Honorable  Meaning  of  Tradition  in  Irenseus. 
— Must  All  Churches  Agree  With  Rome? — Non-Roman 
Visitors  Make  Roman  Tradition. — Belief  of  Irenseus  in 
Infant  Regeneration. — Modern  Eucharistic  Theories. — 
The  Language  of  Irenseus  not  Modern. — My  Body, — 
that  is,  the  Figure  of  My  Body. — Views  Generally  Held, 
but  not  Necessary. — Quotations  from  the  Elders  in 
Irenseus. — Evil  Heredity  of  the  Church  of  Carthage. — 
Tertullian's  Character  and  Gifts. — Tertullian  as  an 
Apologist. — The  New  Note  of  Triumph. — On  the  Pre- 
scription of  Heretics. — Tertullian's  Statement  of  the 
Rule  of  Faith. — Tertullian  not  Definitely  Separated  from 
the  Church. — Tertullian  Witnessing  to  Christian  Usages. 
— Tertullian  on  Treatment  of  Post-Baptismal-Sin. — Fast- 
ing in  the  Post-Apostolic  Church. — Low  Idea  of  Mar- 
riage in  Early  Centuries. — May  a  Lay  Priesthood  Offer 
Alone? — Hippolytus  Probably  a  Bishop-Coadjutor. — The 
Quarrel  about  Doctrine  in  the  Roman  Church. — The 
Quarrel  about  Discipline  in  the  Roman  Church. — The 
Scandal  concerning  St.  Callistus. — Did  Christians  Choose 
an  Embezzler  as  Bishop  ? — The  Roman  Bishops  Did  not 
Go  to  Extremes 258 

CHAP.  X.— Early  Theologians  of  the  East — The 
School  of  Alexandria — Clement — Origen. — The 
Divine  Apathy. — The  Logos  in  Philo. — The  Catechetical 
School. — Clement  of  Alexandria. — Clement  Really  Ortho- 
dox.— Clement's  Writings. — Clement's  Advance  upon 
Philo. — Faults  of  Clement's  Theology. — Origen's  charac- 
ter.— Origen's  Unsparing  Toil. — Origen's  Friendships. 
— Origen  a  Traditionalist. — Origen  both  Allegorical  and 
Literal. — The  Phrase,  "Eternal  Generation." — Origen's 
Doctrine  of  Man. — Origen's  Personal  History. — Narcissus 
of  Jerusalem. — Origen's  First  Stay  in  Csesarea. — Origen's 
Ordination. — Was  Origen  Condemned  as  a  Heretic? — 
Origen's  Burial-place 317 

CHAP.  XI. — The  Church  and  the  Empire  from  Com- 
modus  to  Diocletian— Cyprian  and  His  Times. — 


xviii  Contents. 


PAGE 

Roman  Citizenship  Given  to  all  Freemen. — The  Decian 
PersecutioD. — Chief  Victims  under  Valerian. — Self-sacri- 
fice and  Self-will. — The  Pope  of  Carthage. — Cyprian 
Avoids  the  Persecution. — Sacriflcati,  Thurificati,  Libellatici. 
— Cyprian's  Feeling  about  Martyrs  and  Confessors. — The 
Schism  of  Felicissimus. — Cyprian  Suppresses  Informa- 
tion.— Novation  and  Novatus. — Novatianist  Idea  of  the 
Church. — The  Church  Must  be  One. — Cyprian's  Idea  of 
the  Episcopate. — A  Forger  Enlarges  Cyprian. — Can  Bad 
Men  Do  God's  Works? — Infant  and  Clinic  Baptisms. — 
Bespondere  NataWbus. — Our  Dead  not  Lost. — Stephen  Be- 
comes Bishop  of  Rome. — An  Appeal  from  Gaul. — Begin- 
ning of  the  Re-Baptism  Controversy. — Three  Views  of 
What  is  Baptism. — The  Fifth  Council  of  Carthage. — 
Stephen  Excommunicates  Himself. — Large  Allowance  of 
Wide  Difference. — The  Church  Rejects  Cyprian's  View. 
— Cyprian's  Belief  in  Heavenly  Signs. — Cyprian's  Arrest 
and  Trial. — Cyprian's  Death  and  Glorification. — Cy- 
prian's Lesson  for  To-day 360 

CHAP.  XII. — The  Foety  Yeaes'  Rest,  and  the  Tenth 
Wave. — Dionysius  Opposes  Chiliasm. — Misunderstand- 
ings as  to  the  use  of  Words. — Stories  of  Gregory  Thau- 
maturgus. — St.  Firmilian  of  Csesarea. — Heresy  and  Depo- 
sition of  Paul. — The  Word  Homo-ousios. — Vitality  of  the 
Armenian  Church. — The  Divine  Call  to  the  Ascetic  Life. 
— The  Career  of  St.  Anthony. — Arnobius  and  Lactantius. 
— The  Diocletian  Persecution. — The  Vision  of  Constau- 
tine 422 

CHAP.  XIII.— Last  Woeds  of  Some  Woekings  of  the 
Chuech's  Mind  in  the  Post-Apostolic  Age.— The 
Change  from  Custom  to  Canon. — What  was  Included  in 
the  Faith?— The  Faith  Fixed,  Theology  Free.— The 
Doctrine  of  Confirmation. — Cyprian  on  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands. — Doctrine  of  Eucharist  as  Sacrifice. — Justin  and 
Irenseus  on  Sacrifice. — The  Alexandrians  on  Sacrifice. — 
Early  Views  of  the  Sabbath  Idea. — The  Early  Lord's  Day 
no  Sabbath. — Canon  of  Scripture  not  Settled  Early. — 
Early  Christian  Liturgies. — Contents  of  an  Ancient 
Liturgy. — Liturgies  Point  to  Common  Model. — The 
Creed  not  Said  in  Early  Liturgies. — Lord's  Prayer 
Called  a  Form  of  Consecration. — Are  Forms  in  the 
Didache  Liturgical?— The  Church  is  Christ's  After  All  .    447 


THE  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE. 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE    CHARACTER   AND    BOUNDARIES   OF   THE   POST- 
APOSTOLIC   AGE. 

HE  Post- Apostolic  Age "  is  a  good 
name  for  that  period  in  the  history  of 
the  Church  of  Christ  which  covers  the 
second  and  third  centuries  of  the 
Christian  Era.  The  boundaries  of  the 
period  shall  be  defined  more  closely  in  a  moment. 
Let  us  begin  with  a  word  about  the  natural  differ- 
ence between  an  age  that  was  Apostolic  and  an  age 
that  was  Post-Apostolic.  The  Church  in  every  age 
must  have  leadership.  Men  cannot  live  without 
leaders,  Where  do  such  leaders  come  from  ?  They 
grow;  they  are  evolved.  But  those  who  believe  in 
the  supernatural  origin  of  Christianity  and  the  Deity 
of  the  Christ,  cannot  regard  our  Lord  Jesus  as  a 
leader  that  merely  grew  up  naturally  out  of  the  con- 
ditions of  His  day,  nor  can  they  regard  His  original 
Apostles,  nor  yet  St.  Paul,  as  naturally  evolved  into 
the  positions  they  came  to  occupy,  merely  by  force 
of  their  own  gifts  and  the  operation  of  circumstances. 
Their  gifts  had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  their  great 
work.    Their  circumstances  shaped  their  careers  very 

A  1 


The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


largely,.  ;  But  an.  overruling,  providence  did  far  more. 
Historical  evolution  is  indeed  a  great  fact.  Even 
the  hurnan,  .na'cure  of  our  Blessed  Lord  was  prepared 
for  Him  largely  by  a  process  of  evolution  under 
providential  law,  working  through  long  ages  before 
He  was  born.  No  doubt  of  that.  But  the  chief 
truth  of  His  Being  was  that  He  came  down  from 
heaven,  bringing  a  new  force  into  the  world.  So 
when  He  chose  His  Apostles,  He  chose  such  men 
as  had  by  natural  growth  certain  qualities  that  He 
wanted  for  the  first  leaders  of  His  future  Church, 
but  then  also  He  gave  them  some  very  special  en- 
dowments in  addition,  and  more  particularly  He  so 
sent  them  to  their  work  that  the  Church  could  not 
help  feeling  that  they  were  a  gift  from  Him  much 
rather  than  a  growth  from  itself.  The  same  may  be 
said  of  St.  Matthias,  providentially  selected  to  fill  the 
place  of  Judas,  and  again  of  St.  Paul.  While  any 
of  those  first  leaders  remained  alive  and  active,  the 
Church  must  have  felt  that  it  was  at  least  partially 
under  a  leadership  that  was  in  a  peculiar  sense  let 
down  from  heaven.  From  the  time  that  the  last  of 
those  Apostles  died,  the  Church  must  have  felt  that 
its  leadership  was  in  a  new  way  its  own,  evolved  out 
of  itself,  grown  up  out  of  the  earth.  The  Church 
believed  profoundly  that  its  leaders  who  were  or- 
dained as  presbyters  or  bishops  at  any  period  had 
supernatural  powers  conferred  upon  them  from 
heaven,  but  it  must  have  felt  a  great  difference  be- 
tween leaders  chosen  and  trained  for  it  by  Jesus 
Christ  and  leaders  chosen  and  trained  by  itself. 
The  Church,  going  from  the  Apostolic  Age  to  the 


Its  Beginning. 


Post-Apostolic,  probably  felt  its  own  freedom  and 
its  own  responsibility  somewhat  as  a  boy  going  from 
home  for  the  first  time,  to  enter  college,  feels  his. 
Nearly  up  to  the  death  of  the  last  of  the  Apostles, 
Christians  must  have  felt,  "  All  our  great  questions 
are  decided  for  us."  After  that  turning-point  was 
passed,  Christians  would  feel,  "  Now  we  decide  all 
our  questions  ourselves."  Naturally  also  some  self- 
confident  souls  would  have  rejoiced  greatly  in  this 
new  liberty,  and  some  anxious  souls  would  have 
shrunk  from  it  as  long  as  possible.  In  some  Churches 
the  Post-Apostolic  period  would  practically  begin  as 
soon  as  there  was  no  longer  any  likelihood  of  such  a 
thing  as  that  one  of  the  original  Apostles  should 
ever  visit  their  city,  and  in  others  the  new  conditions 
might  not  be  much  felt  until  there  arose  to  leader- 
ship young  men  who  had  no  personal  recollections 
of  any  of  the  Twelve  nor  of  St.  Paul. 

Thus  the  general  date  for  the  beginning  of  the 
Post-Apostolic  Age  would  be  about  A.  D.  100,  St. 
John  the  Evangelist  being  the  last  survivor  of  the 
Apostles  named  by  our  Lord,  and  dying  at  Ephesus  in 
extreme  old  age,  in  the  third  year  of  the  Emperor 
Trajan,  who  came  to  the  throne  in  A.  D.  98.  But 
some  churches — that  of  the  great  city  of  Rome,  for 
example, — may  well  have  begun  to  enter  upon  the 
Post-Apostolic  lines  of  thought  and  practice  as  early 
as  A.  D.  70,  just  after  the  martyrdom  of  St.  Paul, 
and  others  may  have  been  so  slow  to  face  new  emer- 
gencies as  hardly  to  reach  the  Post- Apostolic  charac- 
ter before  A.  D.  120. 

What  distinguished  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  from 


The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


that  which  went  before  it  was  the  Church's  new  in- 
dependence and  free  self-government.  Our  period 
is  distinguished  from  that  which  came  after  it  by 
another  great  change  of  external  pressure,  and  that 
change  has  a  very  definite  date  indeed.  The  date 
most  commonly  assigned  for  the  beginning  of  a  third 
period  in  Church  History  is  A.  D.  325,  the  date  of 
the  Council  of  Nicsea.  But  while  that  next  period 
is  well  called  "  the  period  of  the  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils," of  which  this  of  Nicsea  was  first,  it  got  its 
prevailing  character  from  another  cause  altogether. 
In  the  second  and  third  centuries  the  Christian  re- 
ligion was  persecuted.  In  the  fourth  and  fifth  and 
sixth  centuries  the  Christian  religion  was  fashion- 
able. The  change  was  tremendous,  of  course,  and  it 
came  suddenly,  when  a  new  emperor,  Constantine, 
made  up  his  mind  that  the  Christian  society  was  so 
large  and  strong  and  had  such  an  influence  over  its 
members,  that  to  make  friends  with  it  and  patronize 
it  was  the  best  possible  means  of  securing  a  loyal 
upholding  of  the  Roman  Empire  in  its  decay.  Con- 
stantine believed,  no  doubt,  that  the  Christian  re- 
ligion was  the  true  religion,  but  there  is  equally  no 
doubt  that  he  thought  it  was  going  to  be  a  great 
piece  of  good  policy  for  him  to  appear  as  its  friend 
and  protector.  From  the  time  that  he  did  so  the 
world  began  to  pour  into  the  Church,  partly  from 
policy,  without  any  conversion,  partly  from  love  of 
going  with  the  crowd,  with  not  more  than  half-con- 
version, and  lo  !  the  Church's  life  and  character  were 
suddenly  and  profoundly  changed.  Few  transitions 
from  one  age  to  another  are  really  sudden  and  clear- 


Its  Terminal  Point. 


cut.  One  period  melts  into  another,  as  dawn  passes 
into  clay.  We  have  recognized  that  in  allowing  the 
beginnings  of  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  to  be  set  down 
as  belonging  anywhere  from  A.  D.  70  to  A.  D.  120. 
But  the  end  of  our  period  and  the  definite  beginning 
of  a  very  different  one  may  be  assigned  to  the  year 
when  Constantine  published  his  Edict  of  Toleration, 
the  Edict  of  Milan,  A.  D.  313.  That  edict  did  not 
in  words  promise  anything  more  than  simple  tolera- 
tion, with  full  legal  protection  for  liberty  and  prop- 
erty, whether  of  individual  Christians,  or  of  the 
Church  ;  but  a  report  got  out  that  the  Emperor  was 
to  be  a  supporter  of  Christianity,  and  ere  long  the 
rumor  became  a  certainty,  and  the  Church  passed  at 
one  bound  from  bloody  persecution  to  fashion  and 
favor. 

It  may  help  us  to  study  intelligently  our  own 
period,  the  Post-Apostolic  Age,  if  we  make  here  a 
brief  comparison  of  the  three  periods,  the  Apostolic, 
the  Post-Apostolic,  and  that  of  the  Ecumenical 
Councils.  In  the  Apostolic  Age  the  great  work  of 
the  Church  was  t@  convert  as  many  Jews  as  possible, 
while  holding  the  door  carefully  open  for  the 
heathen,  or  as  the  technical  phrase  is,  "the  Gen- 
tiles," to  come  in.  Great  as  was  the  glory  and  duty 
of  the  Christian  Church  as  a  universal  missionary  to 
all  men  everywhere,  the  first  and  most  particular 
business  of  the  Christian  Church  of  the  first  century 
was  to  save  from  loss  as  many  Jews  as  possible,  the 
special  people  who  had  been  brought  into  covenant 
with  God  already  as  members  of  the  Church  under 
the  Mosaic  dispensation.     The  question  how  far  the 


6  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Jewish  nation  and  Church  could  be  carried  over  into 
the  new  covenant  and  the  new  life  had  to  be  settled 
in  a  very  few  years.  Till  near  the  end  of  the  first 
century  it  must  have  been  easier  to  make  a  Christian 
out  of  a  religious-minded  Jew  than  out  of  a  heathen 
man.  Before  the  Church  had  gone  far  into  the  sec- 
ond century,  it  must  have  become  much  harder  to 
convert  a  Jew  than  a  heathen.  The  felt  opposition 
of  Judaism  and  Christianity  had  come  to  be  hard- 
ened into  the  most  bitter  and  passionate  of  all  preju- 
dices. In  the  first  age,  then,  the  chief  work  of  the 
Church  had  been  to  save  as  much  as  possible  of  the 
Jewish  nation,  ere  it  was  too  late.  Correspondingly, 
the  Church's  great  danger  was  that  of  allowing 
Judaism  to  narrow  our  Lord's  generous  plan  of  sal- 
vation into  something  too  much  after  the  Mosaic 
order.  The  Church's  chief  conflict  was  with  Juda- 
izers,  eager  to  impose  upon  all  Christians,  even  the 
converts  coming  in  from  heathenism,  such  Mosaic 
laws  as  those  of  Circumcision  and  the  Sabbath.1 
When  our  period  begins,  that  work  had  been  done, 
and  that  difficulty  on  the  whole  wisely  met. 

In  the  Post-Apostolic  Age,  therefore,  the  Church 
settles  down  to  its  enormous  task  of  converting  the 
world.  The  question  how  much  of  the  older  Church 
of  God  could  be  carried  over  into  the  new,  and  that 
other  question,  how  far  the  new  Church  was  to  be 
like  the  old, — how  much,  in  fact,  of  the  older  Church's 
stock  in  trade  was  worth  taking  over  into  the  new 
business,   were    settled    beyond    reopening.      Anti- 

1  For  discussion  of  the  Sunday  observance  of  the  early  Church, 
see  p.  456. 


The   Chief  Difficulties. 


Christian  Judaism  was  henceforth  the  most  hopeless 
of  all  fields  of  work.  The  Church's  great  business 
was  the  conversion  of  the  heathen.  Its  danger  and 
difficulty  were  of  two  kinds.  First,  there  was  perse- 
cution. We  must  read  the  story  of  it  later.  At 
present,  it  is  enough  to  say  that  the  Church  was 
often  in  danger  of  losing  such  members  as  seemingly 
it  could  least  afford  to  lose,  and  did  lose  a  great 
many,  and  of  course,  it  looked  as  if  the  Church's 
progress  was  sorely  hindered.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
it  may  be  doubted  if  the  Church  ever  had  a  more 
prosperous  period  as  regards  real  growth  in  holy 
power  than  this  when  it  was  suffering  frequent  and 
sometimes  awful  persecution.  "  The  blood  of  the 
martyrs  is  the  seed  of  the  Church."  The  Church 
of  this  second  period  was  profoundly  affected  by 
persecution,  but  probably  it  gained  many  more  con- 
verts than  it  lost,  and  more  holiness  also,  by  the  tre- 
mendous experience  of  martyrdom.  Much  more 
dangerous  to  the  Church  at  this  time  was  the  at- 
tempt— there  were  really  a  host  of  them,  as  we  shall 
see — to  rival  the  new  religion  by  the  discovery  of 
another,  still  more  attractive  to  the  mind  of  the  day. 
Imagine  forty  or  fifty  forms  of  what  is  known  as 
"  Christian  Science  "  sweeping  over  the  world  of  our 
day  and  drawing  much  people  after  them,  so  as  to  be 
a  serious  hindrance  to  the  endeavors  of  the  Christian 
Kingdom  to  get  a  hearing.  Then  you  will  have 
some  slight  idea  of  what  the  various  forms  of  Gnosti- 
cism were  to  the  Christian  Church  of  the  second 
century.  We  shall  have  to  notice  some  few  at- 
tempts  to    make    the    Church  different  from   what 


8  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Christ  made  it,  by  reforming  it  in  a  Puritan  direc- 
tion, making  it  narrower  and  more  severe  in  its  dis- 
cipline than  it  had  been ;  but  these  were  compara- 
tively small  movements.  Mostly  the  strife  of  this 
age  was  to  show  men  that  the  Christian  religion  had 
a  claim  on  them  and  an  exclusive  authority,  because 
it  was  a  revelation  from  God.  Hence  it  was  very 
much  an  age  of  published  claims  and  proofs,  in  fact, 
of  Apologetics,  in  that  older  meaning  of  the  word 
which  carries  no  thought  of  having,  in  our  modern 
speech,  anything  to  apologize  for,  but  simply  and 
solely  having  an  answer  to  give  to  any  man  that  is 
ready  to  make  a  reasonable  enquiry  concerning  the 
truth.  It  was  also  an  age  of  forming  a  theology, 
that  is,  of  putting  Christian  truths  into  an  orderly 
form,  so  as  to  show  that  they  go  together  and  make 
a  harmonious  fabric,  not  merely  a  confused  heap,  and 
so  as  to  show  also  that  while  some  of  them  surpassed 
human  reason  utterly,  as  for  example,  the  doctrines 
of  the  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation,  and  could  never 
by  human  reason  l  have  been  established,  yet  none 
of  the  Christian  truths  contradicted  human  reason, 
or  necessarily  antagonized  the  methods  then  current 
among  philosophical  students.  But  of  all  this  we 
shall  have  more  in  our  later  chapters.  The  chief 
point  now  is  that  the  Church's  great  struggle  in  this 
age  was  to  persuade  men  to  accept  Apostolic  Christi- 
anity as  the  one  true  religion,  emphasized  by  the 
death  of  Jesus  Christ  and  sanctioned  by  His  resur- 

1  Yet  it  should  be  observed  that  Plato,  greatest  of  Greek  philoso- 
phers, did  reason  out  for  himself  the  idea  that  the  Unity  of  the 
Perfect  Being  could  uot  be  a  solitary  and  loveless  unity. 


When   Corruption  Entered. 


rection.  The  point  of  difference  between  this  and 
the  next  age  is  that  Arianism  and  later  heresies  pro- 
fessed themselves  to  be  each  the  full  flower  of  truth, 
blooming  in  new  brightness  on  the  Catholic  stem, 
and  interpreting  in  new  forms  what  had  always  been 
the  heart  of  the  Christian  creeds.  They  found 
Apostolic  Christianity  in  possession  of  the  field,  and 
their  only  way  to  get  a  hearing  was  to  claim  to 
speak  with  the  true  voice  of  Apostolic  Christianity. 
But  in  the  Post-Apostolic  Age,  Christianity  had  not 
yet  been  granted  a  patent,  as  it  were,  on  its  device  in 
the  way  of  a  universal  religion.  It  was  still  possible 
for  men  to  suppose  that  they  could  throw  Christ's 
teaching,  or  what  they  liked  of  it,  into  whatsoever 
form  best  pleased  them,  and  offer  it  to  the  wTorld 
under  the  name  of  Christianity,  or  under  any  other 
name,  for  that  matter,  with  as  good  a  chance  of  ac- 
ceptance as  those  could  expect  to  have  who  were 
called  Christians  and  referred  themselves  to.  Apos- 
tolic founders,  and  were  beginning  to  be  known  as 
the  Catholic  Church. 

All  this  is  in  marked  contrast  with  the  conditions 
of  the  third  period  of  the  Church's  life,  the  Age  of 
the  Councils  (A.  D.  313-681).  I  have  mentioned 
that  period  chiefly  to  emphasize  a  certain  important 
distinction.  Men  say  that  the  Primitive  Church  be- 
came corrupted  very  rapidly.  Quite  true.  But  they 
fail  to  distinguish  the  point  where  the  main  stream 
of  corrupting  influence  poured  in.  That  was  just  at 
the  beginning  of  the  third  period,  when  Christianity 
ceased  to  be  persecuted  and  suddenly  became  popu- 
lar.   Under  Constantine's  government  it  did  not  pay 


10  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

any  longer  to  be  known  as  a  heathen.  It  might  pos- 
sibly pay  to  be  known  as  a  Christian.  In  a  short 
time  the  Church  came  to  have  five  times  as  many 
members  as  it  had  numbered  under  persecuting  Dio- 
cletian.1 Then  these  multitudes  of  new-made  Chris- 
tians naturally  wanted  to  adapt  their  Christianity  as 
much  as  possible  to  their  own  tastes.  The  Church's 
work  took  a  new  form.  It  was  to  convert  nominal 
Christians  into  real  ones.  The  Church's  danger  and 
difficulty  were  quite  other  than  they  had  been.  In 
the  Age  of  the  Councils  the  chief  danger  was  world- 
liness  making  Christ's  religion  something  other  than 
Christ  gave.  The  chief  difficulty  was  to  resist  the 
pressure  for  getting  rid  of  mystery  in  religious  be- 
lief, for  relaxing  discipline,  for  making  light  of  sin, 
for  requiring  less  of  spiritual  life.  Then,  also,  it  be- 
came a  much  more  serious  task  for  the  Church  to 
resist  the  reactions  that  were  necessarily  provoked 
by  such  evils,  and  would  mend  them,  or  end  them, 
in  the  Puritan  fashion,  by  limiting  the  Church's 
work  of  grace  to  such  persons  as  were  already  highly 
sanctified,  or  could  profess  to  be  so. 

To  sum  up  all,  the  first  period  of  the  Church,  the 
Apostolic  Age,  is  a  period  of  immaturity  and  prep- 
aration,— one  might  almost  say,  of  infancy.  The 
third  period,  that  of  the  Councils,  is  one  of  much 

1  There  is  reason  for  estimating  the  Christian  population  of  Rome 
about  A.  D.  250  at  fifty  thousand,  which  would  be  as  low  as  five 
per  cent,  of  the  whole  number  of  inhabitants.  Near  the  end  of 
the  next  century,  the  Christian  population  of  Antioch  was  one- 
half  of  the  whole,  a  proportion  ten  times  as  great.  The  accession 
of  Constantine  comes  just  about  halfway  between  these  two  points. 
That  the  Church's  membership  was  multiplied  by  fire  within  fifty 
years  after  that  accession  would  seem  to  be  a  reasonably  low  esti- 
mate. 


Its  Special  Purity.  11 

corruption,  though  also,  thank  God,  one  of  noble  and 
greatly  effectual  resistance  to  corruptions.  The  sec- 
ond period,  the  period  described  in  this  volume,  is — 
not  the  best,  surely,  in  the  Church's  story.  One 
who  really  believes  in  the  power  of  the  indwelling 
Life  of  Jesus  Christ  as  a  leaven  and  in  the  guiding 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  must  certainly  regard  the  Church 
of  the  nineteenth  and  twentieth  centuries  as  a  far 
better  Church  than  the  Church  of  the  second  and 
third.  Not  the  best,  then,  but — the  purest  of  all 
that  the  Church  has  known.  It  will  show  us,  in  the 
serious  judgment  of  the  writer  of  these  lines,  the 
thought  and  purpose  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  less 
modified  by  the  natural  thoughts  and  feelings  of  the 
men  who  are  trying  to  assimilate  His  thoughts,  than 
any  following  age.  Many  earnest  souls  to-day  are 
not  only  filled  full  with  the  prejudices  of  Post-Refor- 
mation thought  in  its  nineteenth  century  Protestant 
form,  but  accept  them  uncritically  as  if  they  were 
fixed  standards  of  Divine  Truth.  Such  will  feel  a 
shock  in  reading  of  some  of  the  thoughts  and  prac- 
tices of  the  Church  of  the  very  first  century  after 
the  Apostles,  the  Church  of  the  pupils  of  St.  John. 
Will  they  not  suffer  an  affectionate  exhortation  from 
their  brother,  the  writer  of  these  lines,  that  they  con- 
demn not  hastily  these  very  early  witnesses  of  the 
Master's  mind?  In  the  sixteenth  century  the  Church 
needed  reforming  sorely,  and  God's  providence  sup- 
plied the  need.  Possibly  our  forefathers  who  were 
engaged  in  that  honorable  undertaking,  may  some- 
times have  thrown  out  with  the  rubbish,  inadvert- 
ently, jewels  which  the  Church  had  been  wont  to 


12  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

wear  when  the  Apostolic  teaching  was  still  ringing 
in  her  ears,  and  when  some  of  her  sons  were  of  those 
who  had  learned  their  religion  from  men  that  had 
been  companions  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the  flesh.  The 
theology  which  resulted  from  an  honest  attempt  of 
martyrs  and  confessors  to  understand  what  they  re- 
ceived almost  directly  from  Jesus  Christ,  may 
seem  as  likely  to  be  sound  and  true  as  a  theology 
which  resulted  from  the  attempt  to  reform  a  deeply 
corrupted  Christianity,  and  got  its  shape  largely  by 
way  of  reaction  from  the  very  corruption  which  it 
essayed  to  remove. 


CHAPTER  II. 

SOURCES   OF  HISTORY  FOR  THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  THE 
POST-APOSTOLIC   AGE. 

OW  do  you  know?"  It  is  a  charac- 
teristic enquiry  of  childhood,  but  it  is 
a  natural  demand  of  maturer  intelli- 
gences, too.  Students  of  history  may 
well  wonder  sometimes  where  histor- 
ical writers  get  their  information,  and  why  different 
books  tell  the  story  in  so  irreconcilably  different 
ways.  The  first  half  of  the  Post- Apostolic  Age  is 
one  of  the  periods  in  which  scholars  have  found  it 
hardest  to  agree  on  their  facts.  It  may  be  particu- 
larly useful,  therefore,  to  have  some  idea  where  they 
go  to  get  them,  and  how  they  get  such  a  wide  differ- 
ence in  their  results.  The  subject  is  large  enough 
to  fill  several  volumes  of  this  size.  In  a  single 
chapter,  it  will  be  understood,  only  a  glimpse  of  it 
can  be  given.  We  shall  here  take  account  of  the 
earliest  Church  History  that  has  come  down  to  us, 
and  of  the  few  works  of  Christian  writers  that  seem 
to  belong  to  what  we  may  call  "  the  transition  per- 
iod "  of  the  Post-Apostolic  Church,  anywhere  from 
75  to  125  A.  D. 

I.  Eusebius.  For  a  short  period,  of  only  two 
hundred  years,  it  would,  of  course,  be  particularly 
interesting  and  helpful  to  have  a  history  of  the  time 

13 


14  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

written  by  a  man  who  had  lived  within  it  himself, — 
a  man  of  learning  and  of  a  laborious  habit,  and  who 
had  access  to  good  libraries,  writing  just  after  the 
period  closed.  All  this  we  have,  most  happily,  in 
the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Eusebius,  bishop  of  Cses- 
area  in  Palestine.  The  place  of  Eusebius  in  history 
is  most  interesting.  He  died  A.  D.  339,  having  been 
bishop  of  Csesarea,  the  metropolis  of  Palestine,  for 
about  twenty-five  years.  He  is  so  precise  in  cutting 
off  certain  persons  and  events  as  belonging  to  "  our 
own  times,"  that  we  are  enabled  to  fix  the  year  of 
his  birth  at  260  or  very  near  that  date.  He  was, 
then,  a  man  of  fifty  years  when  our  period  comes  to 
a  close.  Nearly  one-fourth  of  this  Post-Apostolic 
Age  of  ours  was  covered  by  his  span  of  life,  when 
he  sat  down  to  write  the  story  of  it.  His  history 
shows  signs  of  having  been  written  just  after  the 
turning-point  when  Constantine's  Edict  of  Tolera- 
tion, and  still  more  his  well-known  favorable  attitude 
toward  Christianity  had  begun  to  give  thoughtful  ob- 
servers a  feeling  that  the  Church  was  entering  upon  a 
new  life.1  In  this  view  the  book  is,  in  Bishop  West- 
cott's  words  (quoted  in  Bishop  Lightfoot's  Article, 
Eusebius  of  Gsesarea^  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biog- 
raphy, Vol.  II.  p.  323),  "  the  last  great  literary  monu- 
ment of  the  period  which  it  describes.  It  belongs 
not  only  in  substance,  but  also  in  theological  charac- 


1  There  are  ten  books  of  the  History.  The  tenth  was  written 
within  the  limits  of  the  years  323  and  325,  in  which  last  year  the 
work  was  published,  if  one  can  use  such  a  phrase.  When  there 
were  no  printing-presses,  publishing  a  book  meant  only  announc- 
ing that  it  was  done  and  allowing  professional  scribes  to  begin  to 
make  copies  of  it  for  sale. 


The  Purpose  of  Eusebius.  15 

ter,  to  the  Ante-Nicene  Age.  It  gathers  up  and  ex- 
presses in  a  form  anterior  to  the  age  of  dogmatic 
definition  the  experience,  the  feelings,  the  hopes,  of 
a  body  which  had  just  accomplished  its  sovereign  suc- 
cess, and  was  conscious  of  its  inward  strength."  It 
will  be  interesting  to  note  what  such  a  man  thought 
it  worth  while  to  write  about  in  a  Church  History. 
Here  is  his  own  statement,  the  opening  paragraph 
of  his  great  work.1 

"  It  is  my  purpose  to  write  an  account  of  the  suc- 
cessions of  the  holy  Apostles,  as  well  as  of  the  times 
which  have  elapsed  from  the  days  of  our  Saviour  to 
our  own ;  and  to  relate  the  many  important  events 
which  are  said  to  have  occurred  in  the  history  of  the 
Church ;  and  to  mention  those  who  have  governed 
and  presided  over  the  Church  in  the  most  prominent 
parishes,2  and  those  who  in  each  generation  have  pro- 
claimed the  divine  word  either  orally  or  in  writing.  It 
is  my  purpose  also  to  give  the  names  and  number  and 
times  of  those  who  through  love  of  innovation  have 
run  into  the  greatest  errors,  and  proclaiming  them- 
selves discoverers  of  knowledge  falsely  called,3  have 
like  fierce  wolves  unmercifully  devastated  the  flock 
of  Christ.     It  is  my  intention,  moreover,  to  recount 

'The  translation  is  that  of  Doctor  A.  C.  McGiffert,  of  the 
Union  Theological  Seminary.  His  edition  of  Eusebius,  contained 
in  Vol.  I.  (Second  Series),  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers:  Chris- 
tian Literature  Co.,  is  so  much  the  best  that  can  be  recommended 
to  the  student,  that  it  becomes  necessary  to  say  so,  in  spite  of  its 
being  an  advertisement  for  the  publishers  of  this  volume. 

2  Parish,  as  here  used,  stands  for  bishopric,  for  what  would  now 
be  called  a  diocese.  Diocese  in  the  first  three  Christian  centuries 
meant  a  minor  province  of  the  Roman  Empire,  and  later  a  group 
of  provinces. 

3  Eusebius  is  here  quoting  1  Tim.  vi.  20.  The  reference  is  to 
the  Gnostics. 


16  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  misfortunes  which  immediately  came  upon  the 
whole  Jewish  nation  in  consequence  of  their  plots 
against  our  Saviour,  and  to  record  the  ways  and  the 
times  in  which  the  divine  word  has  been  attacked 
hy  the  Gentiles,  and  to  describe  the  character  of 
those  who  at  various  periods  have  contended  for  it 
in  the  face  of  blood  and  of  tortures,  as  well  as  the 
confessions 1  which  have  been  made  in  our  own  days, 
and  finally  the  gracious  and  kindly  succor  which  our 
Saviour  has  afforded  them  all.  Since  I  propose  to 
write  of  all  these  things,  I  shall  commence  my  work 
with  the  beginning  of  the  dispensation  of  our  Saviour 
and  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

To  show  (1)  the  continuity  of  the  Church  by  show- 
ing in  a  few  leading  cities  the  continuity  of  its  chief 
ministry  as  a  succession  of  Apostles,  to  furnish  (2)  a 
series  of  noteworthy  dates  so  as  to  show  how  events 
were  connected  together,  to  give  (3)  some  account  of 
the  most  distinguished  rulers,  preachers,  and  writers 
in  the  Church,  to  point  out  (4)  the  chief  heresies  that 
had  antagonized  the  faith  of  Christ,  to  make  clear 
(5)  how  Jewish  rejection  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  had 
been  followed  by  God's  rejection  of  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple, and  finally,  to  show  (6)  how,  on  the  other  hand, 
Christianity,  even  more  awfully  persecuted,  had  yet 
been  upheld  and  delivered  and  proved  to  be  an  ob- 
ject of  God's  favor, — to  tell  all  this,  and  to  trace  it 
all  from  the  Incarnation  as  the  only  root  from  which 
such  a  history  could  grow,  was  the  plan  of  Eusebins, 
and  a  truly  philosophical  plan.      How   far  was  he 

1  Confession  was  a  technical  term  for  the  act  of  confessing  Christ 
before  persecutors,  where  the  suffering  fell  short  of  death. 


Qualifications  of  Eusebius.  17 

capable  of  carrying  it  out?  Well,  certainly  he  had 
one  great  qualification.  He  was  a  man  of  extraor- 
dinarily wide  knowledge.  He  knew  books,  and  he 
knew  the  world  and  men.  His  personal  history 
lies  mostly  outside  our  period,  but  it  may  be  men- 
tioned here  that  he  became  one  of  the  most  intimate 
friends  and  trusted  counselors  of  the  first  Christian 
Emperor.  Constantine  was  a  man  of  affairs.  A 
book-worm  could  have  gained  no  such  hold  on  him. 
Eusebius  represents  the  type  of  the  Christian  minis- 
ter who  is  truly  religious  and  truly  devoted  to  the 
work  of  his  calling,  but  is  always  a  man  of  affairs 
too,  a  man  of  the  world  to  his  finger-tips.  Such  a 
man  is  not  apt  to  be  particularly  credulous.  He  may, 
indeed,  if  he  has  not  literary  training,  be  a  bad  sifter 
of  evidence,  and  so  an  untrustworthy  historian.  But 
Eusebius  had  literary  training  from  his  youth.  To 
begin  with,  he  was  a  really  eminent  scholar.  Then 
his  chief  teacher,  a  presbyter  of  Caesarea  named 
Pamphilus,  was  a  man  of  wealth  and  scholarship 
combined,  and  had  gathered  the  richest  collection 
of  writings  of  interest  to  a  Christian  that  that  age 
could  show.  Another  remarkable  library  had  been 
formed  at  Jerusalem  by  the  bishop,  Alexander,  in 
the  first  half  of  the  third  century  (between  the  years 
213  and  251),  and  Eusebius  tells  us  that  he  himself 
gathered  some  of  his  materials  there.  Certainly  he 
had  a  wealth  of  material.  We  must  also  credit  him 
with  a  good  deal  of  ability  in  using  it.  He  is  very 
careful  in  distinguishing  what  he  feels  sure  of  from 
what  he  is  ready  to  give  only  with  such  an  introduc- 
tion as  "  Some  say,"  or  "  The  story  goes,"  or  "  It 
B 


18  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

is  reported."  He  must  have  the  credit  of  being  a 
really  critical  historian.  The  infidel  Gibbon  flings 
one  of  his  most  careless  sneers  at  the  honesty  of  Euse- 
bius,  but  a  more  careful  study  of  the  charges  against 
him  on  this  ground  has  caused  them  to  be  dismissed 
as  worthless  by  some  of  the  most  competent  scholars 
of  our  day.  It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  while  Euse- 
bius  was  deeply  suspected  of  unorthodoxy  amid  the 
confusions  of  the  controversy  against  Arianism,  and 
while  his  name  was  for  that  cause  detestable  in  the 
eyes  of  many  of  the  Church's  scholars,  no  historical 
student  in  the  next  two  centuries  essayed  to  rewrite 
the  history  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Church,  and  do  it  bet- 
ter. There  were  continuations  of  Eusebius  in  plenty. 
Socrates,  Sozomen,  Philostorgius,  Theodore t,  —  all 
these  tried  their  hand  at  rival  versions  of  the  later 
history.  Not  one  ventured  to  try  whether  Eusebius 
could  not  be  improved  upon.  His  book  represents 
the  very  best  scholarship  and  the  very  highest  power 
of  realizing  its  own  history  that  the  Church  possessed 
at  the  close  of  the  Post-Apostolic  period. 

II.  The  Apostolic  Fathers.  Eusebius,  then,  is  of 
immense  value  for  our  earlier  history.  Curiously 
enough,  he  is  of  less  value  for  the  history  of  the 
times  nearer  to  his  own,  for  he  knew  but  little  Latin 
and  but  little  about  the  Latin-speaking  Churches,  as 
of  North  Africa  and  Italy  and  Gaul,  and  when  he 
had  not  books  to  go  by,  he  was  sometimes  misin- 
formed, and  sometimes  missed  hearing  of  things  that 
were  very  interesting.  We  must  pass  now  to  con- 
sider our  other  authorities  for  the  early  part  of  the 
Post-Apostolic  Age,  the  books  which  were  written  by 


The  Letter  of  Barnabas.  19 

men  living  in  that  very  time,  and  which  throw 
much  light  upon  the  development  of  the  Church  in 
their  day.  These  writers  are  commonly  grouped  to- 
gether as  The  Apostolic  Fathers.  Doubtless,  the 
name  was  given  originally  with  the  idea  that  all  the 
persons  whose  writings  were  thus  collected  belonged 
to  what  we  might  call  the  second  generation  of 
Christian  teachers, — that  is,  were  converts  made  by 
some  of  the  original  Apostles,  or  had  at  least  received 
Christian  instruction  from  such.  That  these  writers 
had  received  such  Apostolic  teaching  is  in  most 
cases  probable,  but  not  to  be  proven.  The  name  is 
now  commonly  applied  to  all  Christian  writers  out- 
side the  canon  of  the  New  Testament,  whose  compo- 
sitions can  be  dated  earlier  than  A.  D.  125.  The 
writings  which  may  fairly  be  reckoned  under  this  head 
are  (1)  The  Letter  of  Barnabas,  (2)  The  Teaching  of 
the  Twelve  Apostles,  (3)  The  Letter  of  Clement  of 
Rome,  (4)  The  Shepherd  of  Hennas,  (5)  The  Letters 
of  Ignatius  of  Antioch,  and  (6)  The  Letter  of  Poly- 
carp. 

1.  The  Letter  of  Barnabas  is  not  a  great  book,  but 
it  has  raised  a  great  deal  of  discussion.  A  succes- 
sion of  eminent  scholars  of  the  early  Church, — 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (circa  A.  D.  180-200), 
Origen,  who  succeeded  Clement  as  teacher  of  the 
theological  school  at  Alexandria,  our  historian 
Eusebius,  the  learned  Jerome, — all  these  say  that  it 
is  a  letter  of  Barnabas,  the  Apostle,  once  the  com- 
panion of  St.  Paul.  There  is  no  trace  of  any  dif- 
ferent opinion  in  the  early  Church.  The  present 
writer  feels  no  doubt  that  it  is  really  so.     In  that 


20  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

view  this  letter  would  belong  entirely  to  the  history 
of  the  Apostolic  Age,  but  it  must  be  acknowledged 
that  almost  all  modern  scholars  set  the  ancient  testi- 
mony aside.  It  is  a  very  poor  letter,  and  therefore, 
they  say,  it  must  be  entirely  sub-Apostolic.  Their 
confidence  that  when  once  a  man  was  made  an 
Apostle  he  could  not  say  foolish  things,  is  really 
touching,  but  one  hardly  knows  on  what  it  is  founded. 
But  this  is  riot  all.  If  («)  it  had  been  written  by  a 
Levite,  it  is  argued,  it  would  not  have  made  great 
blunders  about  the  Temple  ritual.  If  (h)  it  had  been 
written  by  an  Apostle,  it  would  have  been  received 
by  the  Church  as  part  of  its  inspired  Scripture.  If  (c) 
it  had  been  written  by  the  "  son  of  exhortation  " — 
that,  rather  than  "son  of  consolation,"  is  Barnabas's 
surname  given  by  fellow-Apostles, — it  would  have 
been  eloquent.  If  (cl)  it  had  been  written  by  one 
who  had  been  matched  as  an  Apostle  with  St.  Paul, 
it  would  have  been  wise.  But  it  should  be  observed 
(«)  that  a  man  might  have  grown  old  as  a  Levite, 
and  yet  never  have  done  any  official  service  in  the 
Temple  in  his  life.  As  to  (6),  the  ancient  Church 
was  sure  that  this  book  was  written  by  the  Apostle 
Barnabas,1  and  yet  did  not  receive  it  as  a  work 
marked  by  divine  inspiration.  That  everything 
written  by  an  Apostle  must  be  the  result  of  a  special 
inspiration,  is  pure  modern  assumption.  The  ancient 
Church  did  not  think  so.  Many  find  in  1  Cor.  v.  9 
and  2  Cor.   vii.  8,  indications  of  two  letters  of  St. 


*It  could  not  have  been  written  by  some  other  Barnabas,  for 
Barnabas  was  not  then  a  personal  name,  but  only  a  complimentary 
title  given  to  this  one  eminent  Christian. 


The  Anti- Jewish  Party.  21 

Paul  not  preserved  by  the  Church  as  canonical,  and 
certainly  St.  John  wrote  a  letter  to  some  Church 
(see  3  John  9)  which  was  neither  preserved  nor  even 
respected.  Then  as  to  (c)  and  ((/),  experience  shows 
that  men  may  be  most  moving  public  speakers,  yet 
very  ineffective  writers,  and  hardly  to  be  described 
as  thinkers  at  all.  "  Barnabas  and  Paul  "  are  mated 
in  the  Acts,  but  they  were  not  well  matched,  and  so 
far  from  it  that  they  could  not  permanently  work  to- 
gether. If  the  Apostle  Barnabas  had  a  fine,  impress- 
ive presence,  a  warm,  generous  heart,  a  great  gift  of 
speech,  and  a  singularly  small  share  of  brains,  he 
would  be  a  most  natural  person,  such  as  most  of  us 
have  known,  and  equally  consistent  with  the  narrative 
of  the  Acts  and  with  the  facts  of  this  curious  letter 
which  bears  his  name. 

The  letter  itself  does  not  tell  us  much  about  the 
early  Church,  but  it  shows  something  of  the  thoughts 
and  feelings  of  the  extreme  anti-Jewish  party.1  That 
party  hated  everything  Jewish.  They  were  fiercely 
unwilling,  as  we  shall  see,  to  keep  their  Easter  at 
the  same  time  with  the  Jewish  Passover.  They  de- 
spised the  Temple  and  its  services,  which  their  great 
leader,  St.  Paul,  always  honored.  They  could  see  no 
good  in  the  Jewish  Scriptures  even,  unless  they  could 
turn  them  all  into  meanings  that  the  Jews  themselves 

1  The  last  time  that  Barnabas  appears  before  us  in  the  New 
Testament  (Gal.  ii.  13),  he  is  classed  with  Judaizers, — even  Bar- 
nabas teas  carried  away  with  their  dissimulation  (R.  V.).  But  the 
"even  "  shows  that  Barnabas  had  been  on  the  liberal  side  at  first, 
and  if  he  was  the  man  of  feeling  rather  than  of  thought  that  we 
have  supposed  him  to  be,  nothing  would  be  more  natural  than 
that  after  St.  Paul's  rebuke  had  brought  him  out  of  a  false  posi- 
tion, he  should  go  plunging  to  the  opposite  extreme. 


22  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 


had  never  dreamed  of.  Here  again  St.  Paul  was 
their  leader.  He  certainly  saw  mystical  meanings  in 
Old  Testament  stories,  as  we  may  observe  in  Gal. 
iv.  But  here  again  they  left  St.  Paul  behind,  both 
because  they  gave  up  the  study  of  the  literal  mean- 
ing as  unprofitable,  and  because  they  ran  wild  in 
their  notions  of  the  spiritual  meaning.  Two  brief 
extracts  will  suffice  to  show  Barnabas  at  his  worst 
and  again  at  his  best. 

He  is  at  his  worst  in  Chapter  X.,  discoursing  on  the 
prohibition  of  certain  kinds  of  food  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment : 

"  Moses  spoke  with  a  mystical  reference.  For  this 
reason  he  named  the  swine  as  much  as  to  say,  Thou 
shalt  not  join  tlryself  to  men  who  resemble  swine. 
For  when  they  live  in  pleasure,  they  forget  their 
Lord ;  but  when  they  come  to  want  they  acknowl- 
edge the  Lord.  And  the  swine,  when  it  has  eaten, 
does  not  acknowledge  its  master;  but  when  it  is 
hungry,  it  cries  out,  and  on  receiving  food  is  quiet 
again.  Neither  shalt  thou  eat,  says  he,  the  eagle  nor 
the  hawk,  nor  the  kite,  nor  the  raven.  Thou  shalt  not 
join  thyself,  he  means,  to  such  men  as  know  not  how 
to  procure  food  for  themselves  by  labor  and  sweat, 
but  seize  on  that  of  others  in  their  iniquity,  and  al- 
though wearing  an  aspect  of  simplicity,  are  on  the 
watch  to  plunder  others.  So  these  birds,  while  they 
sit  idle,  enquire  how  they  may  devour  the  flesh  of 
others,  proving  themselves  pests  by  their  wickedness. 
And  thou  shalt  not  eat  the  lamprey,  or  the  polypus,  or 
the  cuttle-fish.  He  means,  Thou  shalt  not  join  thy- 
self to,  or  be  like,  such  men  as  are  ungodly  to  the 


Barnabas 's  Allegorism.  23 

end,  and  are  condemned  to  death.  In  like  manner 
as  those  fishes,  alone  accursed,  float  in  the  deep,  not 
swimming  like  the  rest,  but  make  their  abode  in  the 
mud  which  lies  at  the  bottom."  l 

In  Chapter  XVI.  we  have  our  writer  at  his  best. 
He  is  not  fair  to  God's  elder  church,  and  he  ignores 
a  great  truth,  that  God  does  in  all  ages  bring  His 
Presence  to  bear  on  men  at  some  times  and  in  some 
places  more  than  at  other  times  and  in  other  places, 
but  he  has  a  noble  and  true  thought  in  him,  worthy 
of  a  "  son  of  exhortation." 

44  Moreover,  I  will  also  tell  you  concerning  the 
Temple  how  the  wretched  (Jews),  wandering  in 
error,  trusted  not  in  God  Himself,  but  in  the  Tem- 
ple as  being  the  House  of  God.  For  almost  after 
the  manner  of  the  Gentiles  they  worshipped  Him  in 
the  Temple.2  But  learn  how  the  Lord  speaks  when 
abolishing  it :  Who  hath  meted  the  heaven  ivith  a 
span,  or  the  earth  with  his  palm  f  Have  not  If  [Isa. 
xl.  12.]  Thus  saith  the  Lord:  Heaven  is  My  throne, 
and  the-  earth  My  footstool:  what  kind  of  house  will  ye 
build  to  Me  f  or  what  is  the  place  of  My  rest?  [Isa.  lxvi. 
1.]    Ye  perceive  that  their  hope  is  vain.     Moreover, 


1  If  this  seems  to  any  modern  reader  too  absurd  to  have  been 
produced  by  a  man  who  had  worked  in  company  with  St.  Paul,  it 
may  be  observed  that  Clement  of  Alexandria,  writing  a  hundred 
years  later,  repeats  this  very  line  of  interpretation,  and  yet 
Clement  of  Alexandria  was  probably  the  greatest  Christian  scholar 
and  most  distinguished  teacher  of  his  day. 

2Barnabas's  word  rendered  "worshipped"  is  literally  "they 
hallowed  Him  off."  Perhaps  it  means,  "  they  localized  His  Pres- 
ence in  the  Temple  so  much  in  their  idea  of  things,  that  practi- 
cally they  left  no  place  for  Him  in  the  world  of  men's  common 
life.  They  shut  Him  up  in  the  Temple  almost  as  much  as  the 
heathen  do  their  gods." 


24  The  Post- Apostolic  Age, 

He  says  again,  Behold,  they  ivho  have  cast  doiun  this 
Temple,  even  they  shall  build  it  up  again}  It  has  so 
happened.  For  through  their  going  to  war  it  was 
destroyed  by  their  enemies,  and  now  they,  as  the 
servants  of  their  enemies,  shall  rebuild  it.2  .... 
Let  us  enquire,  then,  if  there  is  still  a  temple  of  God. 
There  is — where  He  Himself  declared  that  He  would 
make  it  and  finish  it.  For  it  is  written,  It  shall  come 
to  pass  when  the  week  is  completed,  the  Temple  of  God 
shall  he  built  in  glory  in  the  Name  of  the  Lord.3  I 
find,  therefore,  that  a  temple  does  exist.  Learn  then 
how  it  shall  be  built  in  the  Name  of  the  Lord.  Be- 
fore we  believed  in  God,  the  habitation  of  our  heart 
was  corrupt  and  weak,  as  being  indeed  like  a  temple 
made  with  hands.  For  it  was  full  of  idolatry,  and 
was  a  habitation  of  demons,  through  our  doing  such 
things  as  were  opposed  to  God.  But  it  shall  be 
built,  observe  ye,  in  the  Name  of  the  Lord,  in  order 
that  the  Temple  of  the  Lord  may  be  built  in  glory. 
How?  Learn.  Having  received  the  forgiveness  of 
sins,  and  placed  our  trust  in  the  Name  of  the  Lord, 
we  have  become  new  creatures  formed  again  from 
the  beginning.     Wherefore  in  our   habitation   God 


1  This  is  a  misquotation  of  Isa.  xlix.  17,  which  was  given  in  the 
Greek  version  called  the  Septuagint  as  Thou  shalt  soon  be  built  up 
by  those  by  whom  thou  wast  destroyed. 

2 This  should  be  rather,  "the  very  servants  of  their  enemies 
shall  rebuild  it,"  or  possibly,  "  they  and  the  servants,"  etc.  In 
either  reading  the  meaning  is,  as  presently  appears,  that  men 
converted  to  tbe  faith  and  worship  of  the  Christian  Church  are 
built  into  a  spiritual  temple,  and  are  themselves  builders  of  such 
a  temple,  though  they  be  servauts  of  a  great  heathen  empire. 

3 It  is  hardly  worth  while  to  refer  as  editors  do,  to  Daniel  ix. 
24,  27,  and  Haggai  ii.  9.  More  probably  Barnabas  had  read  such 
a  passage  in  some  apocryphal  book. 


The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles.  25 

truly  dwells  in  us.  How?  His  word  of  faith;  His 
calling  of  promise ,  the  wisdom  of  the  statutes ;  the 
commands  of  the  doctrine;  He  Himself  prophesying 
in  us;  He  Himself  dwelling  in  us,  opening  to  us  who 
were  enslaved  by  death,  the  doors  of  the  Temple,  that 
is,  the  mouth  j1  and  by  giving  us  repentance  He  intro- 
duced us  into  the  incorruptible  Temple.  He,  then, 
who  wishes  to  be  saved  looks  not  to  man,  but  to  Him 
who  dwelleth  in  him  and  speaketh  in  him,  amazed  at 
never  having  either  heard  Him  utter  such  words  with 
His  mouth,  nor  himself  desired  to  hear  them.  This 
is  the  spiritual  Temple  built  for  the  Lord." 

It  remains  to  note  concerning  the  date  of  this  lit- 
tle tract,  that  it  refers  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  must,  therefore,  have  been  written  after  A. 
D.  70.  The  language  used  seems  to  imply  that  it 
was  not  long  after.  Bishop  Lightfoot,  who  thinks 
the  Apostle  Barnabas  cannot  have  been  the  writer, 
still  dates  it  somewhere  between  70  and  79.  We 
shall  refer  to  it  again  in  connection  with  the  subjects 
of  Baptism  and  the  Sabbath. 

2.  The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles.  This  is  a 
curious  little  book  with  a  curious  story.  In  1873  a 
learned  ecclesiastic  of  the  Greek  Church,  Philotheos 
Bryennios,  then  Bishop  of  Serrse  in  Macedonia,  but 
residing  in  Constantinople,  was  examining  some  old 
manuscripts  preserved  in  the  library  of  the  Monas- 
tery of  the  Holy  Sepulchre.  Among  them  he  found, 
to  his  surprise  and  joy,  one  that  contained  the  entire 

1  Barnabas  calls  the  mouth  the  door  of  that  Temple  which  every 
Christian  man's  body  is  made  to  be,  and  then  passes  at  once  to 
the  incorruptible  body,  the  Church. 


26  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

letter  of  Clement  of  Rome  to  the  Corinthians,  of 
which  the  closing  chapters  had  been  missing  for  some 
centuries,  and  several  other  copies  of  ancient  writ- 
ings, one  of  them  bearing  the  title,  The  Teaching  of 
the  Tivelve  Apostles.  Reading  ancient  manuscripts  is 
hard  work,  even  for  a  scholar  accustomed  to  such 
tasks,  and  it  was  not  till  five  years  after  that  Bishop 
Bryennios  examined  the  Teaching^  or  as  it  is  some- 
times called,  by  its  Greek  name,  the  Didache^  enough 
to  realize  that  this  also  was  a  treasure,  being  a  sort 
of  Church  Manual  illustrating  the  Christian  life  of 
the  first  century.  The  Teaching  was  not  published 
till  1883,  and  scholarship  has  not  had  time  to  say  its 
last  word  about  a  good  many  questions  connected 
with  it.  If  pretty  generally  we  follow  the  judgment 
of  Doctor  Salmon,  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  au- 
thor of  the  article  on  the  Teaching  in  the  Dictionary 
of  Christian  Biography,  we  shall  be  following  a  good 
guide. 

The  book  does  not  profess  to  come  from  the  origi- 
nal Apostles,  but  to  give  such  teaching  and  direction 
as  they  would  have  approved,  just  as  the  title  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed  was  not  intended  to  imply  that  the 
first  Apostles  ever  heard  that  form  of  words.  It 
begins  with  six  chapters  intended  as  an  instruction 
in  practical  Christian  living  for  persons  preparing 
for  baptism, —  Catechumens ',  persons  in  process  of  be- 
ing catechised,  was  the  Church's  technical  term  for 
such,- — and  then  it  has  chapters  on  the  form  of  bap- 
tism, on  fasting  and  prayer,  on  forms  of  devotion  to 
be  used  at  the  Holy  Communion,  on  the  treatment 
due  to  Christian  teachers,  on  the  observance  of  the 


A  Eucharistic  Fragment.  27 

Lord's  Day,  on  the  choice  of  good  men  for  the  work 
of  the  ministry,  and  on  the  Second  Coming  of  our 
Lord.  For  an  example  of  its  contents  we  may  take 
Chapters  IX.  and  X.,  containing  devotions  to  be 
used  by  the  congregation  at  the  Holy  Communion. 
That  service,  by  the  way,  was  almost  invariably 
spoken  of  by  primitive  Christians  as  "  the  Eucharist," 
— which  means  the  Thanksgiving  or  Thank-offering, 
and  the  same  word  will  be  used  henceforth  in  this 
book.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  Eucharist  is  not 
spoken  of  as  "  the  Lord's  Supper  "  by  any  Christian 
writing  of  the  first  three  centuries,  though  some- 
times it  is  called  "  the  Mystical  Supper,"  1  and  there 
are  but  three  examples  of  calling  a  Christian  Altar 
a  "  table  "  in  the  same  period.  Nobody  would  have 
objected  to  such  language,  but  it  was  not  the  kind 
of  language  which  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  did  actu- 
ally inherit  from  the  Apostolic.  Concerning  the 
curious  notion  that  the  forms  which  we  are  about  to 
give  constitute  a  "liturgy," — that  is,  are  given  for 
the  minister  to  use  as  sufficient  forms  for  the  "bless- 
ing "  of  the  bread  and  the  cup  of  the  Eucharist, 
see  p.  481. 

"Now  as  regards  the  Eucharist,  give  thanks  after 
this  manner  :  first  for  the  cup :  '  We  give  thanks  to 
Thee,  our  Father,  for  the  holy  vine  of  David,  Thy 
servant,  which    Thou    hast  made   known   unto  us 


1  "Mystical  Supper,"  by  Dionysius  the  Great,  Bishop  of  Alex- 
andria, A.  D.  254,  who  also  speaks  of  a  communicant  as  "stand- 
ing at  the  Holy  Table,"  and  "shrinking  from  approaching  the 
Table";  "Mystical  Divine  Supper,"  by  Hippolytus,  Bishop  of 
Portus,  A.  D.  220,  in  his  commentary  on  Prov.  ix.  2,  where  also 
the  Altar  is  called  "  the  Mystical  Divine  Table." 


28  The  'Post- Apostolic  Age. 

through  Jesus,  Thy  Servant.  To  Thee  be  the 
glory  forever.'  And  for  the  broken  bread  :  4  We 
give  thanks  to  Thee,  our  Father,  for  the  life  and 
knowledge  which  Thou  hast  made  known  unto  us 
through  Jesus,  Thy  Servant.  To  Thee  be  the  glory 
forever.  As  this  broken  bread  was  scattered  upon 
the  mountains,  and  gathered  together  became  one,  so 
let  Thy  Church  be  gathered  together  from  the  ends 
of  the  earth  into  Thy  Kingdom,  for  Thine  is  the 
glory  and  the  power  through  Jesus  Christ  forever.' 

"But  let  no  one  eat  or  drink  of  your  Eucharist, 
except  those  baptized  into  the  Name  of  the  Lord ; 
for  as  regards  this  also  the  Lord  has  said :  '  Give 
not  that  which  is  holy  to  the  dogs.' 

"Now  after  being  filled,  give  thanks  after  this 
manner :  *  We  thank  Thee,  Holy  Father,  for  Thy 
Holy  Name,  which  Thou  hast  caused  to  dwell  in  our 
hearts,  and  for  the  knowledge  and  faith  and  im- 
mortality, which  Thou  hast  made  known  to  us 
through  Jesus,  Thy  Servant.  To  Thee  be  the  glory 
forever.  Thou,  O  Almighty  Master,  didst  make  all 
things  for  thy  Name's  sake ;  Thou  gavest  food  and 
drink  to  men  for  enjo}rment,  that  they  might  give 
thanks  to  Thee ;  but  to  us  Thou  didst  freely  give 
spiritual  food  and  drink  and  eternal  life  through 
Thy  Servant.  Before  all  things  we  give  thanks  to 
Thee  that  Thou  art  mighty.  To  Thee  be  the  glory 
forever.  Remember,  O  Lord,  Thy  Church,  to  deliver 
her  from  all  evil,  and  to  perfect  her  in  Thy  love ; 
and  gather  her  together  from  the  four  winds,  sancti- 
fied for  Thy  Kingdom  which  Thou  didst  prepare  for 
her :  for   Thine  is  the  power  and  the  glory  forever. 


Jewish  Tone  of  Didache.  29 

Let  grace  come,  and  let  this  world  pass  away.  Ho- 
sanna  to  the  God  of  David.  If  any  one  is  holy,  let 
him  come.  If  any  one  is  not  holy,  let  him  repent. 
Maranatha.     Amen.' 

"  But  permit  the  prophets  to  give  thanks  as  much 
as  they  will." 

The  writer  was  plainly  one  who  loved  the  Scrip- 
ture utterances  concerning  God's  "Vine,"  and  who 
loved  to  think  of  "  the  True  Vine  "  as  truly  a  "  Vine 
of  David  "  also.  He  belonged  to  that  school  in  the 
Church  to  which  Jewish  traditions  were  a  pride  and 
joy,  and  to  be  of  Jewish  descent  a  peculiar  honor. 
"Hosanna  to  the  God  of  David,"— "  God "  can 
hardly  be  an  error  for  "  Son  "  in  the  manuscript,  as 
some  editors  would  call  it — comes  readily  from  his 
lips,  and  "  Jesus,  Thy  servant,"  is  a  natural  phrase 
from  a  man  of  Jewish  atmosphere,  to  whom  Isaiah's 
prophecies  about  "  the  Lord's  servant "  1  would  be 
traditionally  dear.  Anti- Jewish  Christians  leaned 
away  from  such  phrases,  as  too  little  honoring  to  the 
Divine  Lord.  Hence  the  mistake  of  making  over 
this  very  phrase,  "  Thy  Servant  Jesus,"  into  "  Thy 
Child  Jesus"  in  versions  of  Acts  iii.  13,  26,  and 
iv.  27,  30,  a  mistake  which  goes  back  sixteen  cen- 
turies at  least. 

The  Jewish  tone  of  this  book  and  the  allusion  to 
corn  scattered  over  the  hills  make  it  seem  likely  that 
it  was  written  in  mountainous  Palestine.  Its  date 
is  assigned  by  most  English  scholars,  as  by  Bishop 

'Isa.  xlii.  1;  xliii.  10;  xlix.  5,  6;  lii.  13;  liii.  11,  and  cf.  a 
most  valuable  note  on  the  phrase  in  the  Sjyeaker's  Commentary, 
called  in  America  the  Bible  Commentary,  at  the  end  of  Isa.  xli. 


30  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Lightfoot,  to  the  last  quarter  of  the  first  century. 
Doctor  Salmon  would  date  it  about  120,  and  Professor 
Harnack,  the  leading  German  authority,  between  130 
and  165,  but  these  scholars  agree  in  thinking  that  we 
have  here  a  first  century  book,  worked  over  with  ad- 
ditions by  a  later  hand.  All  agree  that  the  Teaching 
gives  a  picture  of  Church  life  more  characteristic  of 
the  first  Christian  century  than  of  the  second,  Har- 
nack even  declaring  that  its  general  view  comes 
nearer  to  the  picture  presented  by  the  Epistles  to  the 
Corinthians  than  even  to  that  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians  in  our  New  Testaments.  If  it  was  first 
written  in  the  second  century,  it  must  have  been  in 
some  rustic  community  that  lagged  behind  the  age. 
It  may  be  added  that  the  opening  chapters  of  the 
Teaching  and  the  closing  chapters  of  Barnabas  seem 
to  be  drawn  from  a  common  source,  probably  a  pop- 
ular Jewish  manual  of  pre-Christian  date. 

3.  The  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  to  the  Corin- 
thians. We  come  now  to  a  noble  monument  of  early 
Christian  thought  and  feeling,  described  by  Bishop 
Lightfoot  as  the  most  important  writing,  outside  of 
the  volume  of  Holy  Scripture,  produced  in  the  first 
century.  It  is  a  letter  from  "  the  Church  of  God 
which  sojourneth  at  Rome  to  the  Church  of  God 
which  sojourneth  at  Corinth."  So  it  describes  itself 
in  its  opening  words,  and  no  reference  is  anywhere 
made  to  any  individual  authorship  ;  but  abundant 
testimony  ascribes  it  to  Clement,  a  chief  minister  of 
the  Church  at  Rome,  and  the  weight  of  scholarship 
is  extraordinarily  agreed  as  to  its  date.  A.  D.  96 
cannot  be  more  than  a  few  months  out  of  the  way. 


St.   Clement  not  the   Consul.  31 

We  must  introduce,  as  briefly  as  we  may,  the  writer, 
the  circumstances  of  his  writing,  and  the  writing  itself 
(a)  The  writer  bears  the  name  of  Clement,  in 
Latin,  Clemens,  and  he  wrote  when  the  Emperor 
Domitian  (Titus  Flavins  Domitianus)  had  just  been 
waging  a  bitter  persecution  against  the  Christians  of 
Rome.  History  tells  us  that  in  the  last  year  of 
Domitian's  life  his  own  cousin,  Titus  Flavins  Cle- 
mens, fresh  from  the  honors  of  a  consulship,  and  his 
cousin's  wife,  Flavia  Domitilla,  were  convicted  on  a 
charge  of  atheism,  having  embraced  certain  Jewish 
superstitions,  and  were  condemned,  the  consul  Clem- 
ent to  death,  and  Domitilla  to  banishment.  The  sus- 
picion that  these  were  really  Christian  converts, 
found  in  the  very  highest  circle  of  wealth  and  social 
station,  has  been  greatly  confirmed  within  the  last 
fifty  years  by  the  discovery  of  an  ancient  Christian 
burial-place  granted  to  Christian  uses  by  Flavia 
Domitilla  herself.  It  has  been  a  fascinating  sug- 
gestion to  some  that  the  consul  Clement  of  the  im- 
perial house  was  the  distinguished  Christian  who 
wrote  this  letter  in  the  name  of  the  Christians  of  the 
Roman  city.  There  are  fatal  objections  to  such  a 
theory.  The  Church  was  never  so  unworldly  as  to 
keep  no  record  of  the  fact  that  among  its  writers 
was  one  of  the  imperial  family,  nor  so  unheavenly  as 
to  forget  his  martyrdom.  More  probably  the  consul 
was  not  a  martyr  at  all,  but  simply  a  man  who 
through  his  wife  had  been  drawn  near  enough  to  the 
new  religion  to  give  a  jealous  tyrant  an  excuse  for 
removing  a  rival  that  stood  too  near  the  throne. 
Clement,    the  writer,  has  not  the  literary  qualities 


32  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

that  would  be  likely  to  belong  to  a  noble  Roman, 
educated  under  the  first  masters  of  the  day.  On  the 
other  hand,  he  has  a  familiar  knowledge  of  the  Old 
Testament,  which  seems  to  point  to  a  Jewish  origin. 
And  yet  it  seems  particularly  likely  that  the  Jew  boy 
derived  his  name  from  the  noble  Roman  house. 
Lightfoot's  conjecture  lias  great  probability,  that  he 
was  a  freed  man,  or  at  most  a  freedman's  son,  either 
he  or  his  father  having  been  once  a  slave  in  the 
household  of  the  Clements.  That  would  account 
for  his  noble  name  and  make  a  very  natural  story. 
It  was  by  way  of  Jews  that  Christianity  found  its 
way  to  Gentiles  in  almost  every  city,  we  may  be 
sure.  It  found  its  readiest  way  of  advance  in  the 
hearts  of  the  oppressed  and  the  poor.  Rich  men  of 
those  days  held  slaves  in  enormous  number  and  of 
every  nationality.  Finally,  it  was  a  common  thing 
to  find  slaves  filling  positions  that  required  a  large 
share  of  education  and  general  culture,  and  as  to  the 
social  feeling  of  the  Church  we  may  note  that  the 
Roman  writer,  Hermas,  of  whom  we  shall  be  hearing 
presently,  describes  himself  as  having  been  a  slave, 
and  yet  he  seems  to  have  been  an  elder  brother  of 
Pius,  who  about  A.  D.  140  succeeded  to  the  bishop- 
ric of  Rome.  That  Clement,  the  writer,  was,  in  the 
speech  of  to-day,  "  a  gentleman,"  is  beyond  a  doubt. 
That  his  family  had  within  a  few  years  known  the 
hard  discipline  of  slavery,  is  highly  probable. 

So  much  for  what  he  was  in  himself.  What  was 
he  to  the  Church  in  Rome  ?  All  Christian  tradition 
says,  its  bishop.  Modern  scholars  are  divided  about 
that,  some  being  very  unwilling  to  acknowledge  that 


Was  St.  Clement  a  Bishop?  33 

there  were  any  bishops  in  the  modern  sense  in  any 
Christian  cities  of  Europe  at  so  early  a  day.  Ire- 
nseus,  who  visited  Rome  about  A.  D.  175,  gives  a 
list  of  the  bishops  of  that  see  down  to  his  time. 
44  Linus,  Anencletus,  Clemens,  Evarestus,"  it  begins, 
aiid  that  same  list  is  given  by  all  Eastern  writers 
who  deal  with  the  subject.  But  there  is  another 
tradition,  which  grew  up  at  Rome,  and  prevailed 
there  too,  which  makes  the  first  names  to  be 
44  Linus,  Clemens,  Cletus,  Anacletus,  Evarestus." 
44  Plainly,"  say  the  objectors,  44  there  were  no 
bishops  at  the  beginning,  and  so  different  people 
made  up  their  imaginary  successions  differently." 
It  seems  hard  to  believe  that  in  175  the  Roman 
Christians  supposed  that  government  by  a  single 
ecclesiastic,  44  Monarchical  Episcopacy,"  had  existed 
among  them  for  over  a  century,  when  really  it  had 
been  introduced  among  them  less  than  fifty  years 
before,  and  Lightfoot  has  shown  in  a  masterly  way 
how  the  later  list  is  to  be  accounted  for  with  all  its 
blundering.  It  is  noteworthy,  also,  that  even  after 
the  order  of  the  later  list  had  become  the  thoroughly 
accepted  tradition  at  Rome,  the  commemoration  of 
the  faithful  dead  in  the  Liturgy  continued  still,  as 
it  continues  to  this  daj^,  to  make  mention  of  the 
Apostles,  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and  the  rest,  and 
then  of  44  Linus,  Cletus,  Clemens,"  showing  that  the 
tradition  known  to  Irenseus  had  been  embodied  in  the 
Roman  Church's  Prayer  Book  too  long  when  the 
blundering  correction  was  made, — probably  about 
A.  D.  234, — for  the  Church  to  be  willing  to  change 
the  familiar  form  of  prayer. 
c 


34  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

(b)  As  for  the  circumstances  of  Clement's  writ- 
ing, the  occasion  of  his  letter  was  a  church  quarrel. 
Clement  speaks  of  it  as  a  "  detestable  and  unholy 
sedition,"  and  as  one  "which  a  few  headstrong  and 
unruly  persons  have  kindled,"  but  with  gentle  tact 
he  does  not  go  into  particulars.  That  would  have 
been  very  informing  for  us,  but  at  Corinth  it  would 
only  have  given  the  opposition  a  handle  for  saying  that 
he  had  here  or  there  misstated  the  case.  Clement  is 
as  disappointing  as  he  was  wise  in  his  vagueness.  We 
can  just  make  out  that  the  trouble  was  an  uprising  of 
a  very  few  leading  laymen  against  the  authority  of  the 
clergy,  "the  presbyters,"1  and  then,  incidentally, 
that  he  lays  the  whole  trouble  to  jealousy,  and  that 
in  his  examples  he  brings  in  three  illustrations  of  the 
union  of  faith  and  hospitality,  Abraham,  Lot,  and 
Raha,  as  if  somehow  a  question  of  entertaining 
brethren  from  abroad  had  come  into  this  difficulty. 

May  it  not  be  that  we  have  here  the  very  case 

1  Cf.  chapter  xlvii.  "Take  up  the  Epistle  of  the  blessed  Paul 
the  Apostle.  What  wrote  he  first  unto  you  iu  the  beginning  of 
the  Gospel?  Of  a  truth  he  charged  you  in  the  Spirit  concerning 
himself  and  Cephas  and  Apollos,  because  that  even  then  ye  had 
made  parties.  Yet  that  making  of  parties  brought  less  sin  upon 
you,  for  ye  were  partisans  of  Apostles  that  were  highly  reputed, 
and  of  a  man  approved  iu  their  sight.  But  now  mark  ye  who 
they  are  that  have  perverted  you  and  diminished  the  glory  of 
your  renowned  love  for  the  brotherhood.  It  is  shameful,  dearly 
beloved,  yes,  utterly  shameful,  and  unworthy  of  your  conduct  in 
Christ,  that  it  should  be  reported  that  the  very  ancient  Church 
of  the  Corinthians,  for  the  sake  of  one  or  two  persons,  maketh 
sedition  against  its  presbyters."  Chapter  lvii.  "Ye,  therefore, 
that  laid  the  foundation  of  the  sedition,  submit  yourselves  unto 
the  presbyters,  and  receive  chastisement  and  repentance,  bending 
the  knees  of  your  heart.  .  .  .  It  is  better  for  you  to  be  found 
little  in  the  flock  of  Christ,  and  to  have  your  name  on  God's  roll, 
than  to  be  had  in  exceeding  honor,  and  yet  be  cast  out  from  the 
hope  of  Him," 


Does  3  St.  John  Refer  to  this   Quarrel?       35 

about  which  St.  John  wrote  his  third  Epistle  ?  In 
St.  Paul's  time  there  lived  at  Corinth  a  rich  Chris- 
tian bearing  the  Roman  name  of  Caius, — we  read  it 
in  the  Greek  form  Gains,  in  our  version, — who  en- 
tertained traveling  brethren  so  generously  that  St. 
Paul  writes  of  him  to  the  Romans  (Rom.  xvi.  23), 
"Gaius,  mine  host,  and  of  the  whole  Church,  saluteth 
you."  St.  John  writes  (nearly  forty  years  after,  to 
be  sure)  to  a  prominent  Christian  named  Caius, 
evidently  living  in  one  of  the  centres  of  Church 
work,  and  apparently  a  very  old  man,  like  St.  John 
himself,  for  St.  John  writes  in  a  brotherly,  rather 
than  fatherly,  tone,  and  seems  tenderly  solicitous 
about  his  friend's  health,  who  is  noted  for  his  hos- 
pitality "  to  the  brethren,  and  that,  strangers,"  as 
we  ought  to  read  in  3  St.  John  5,  or  "toward  them 
that  are  brethren,  and  strangers  withal."  Is  this  the 
same  Caius  of  Corinth?  It  is  certainly  possible. 
Then  we  have  one  Diotrephes,  "  who  loveth  to  have 
the  preeminence,"  who  refuses  hospitality  to  Chris- 
tian missionaries,  declines  to  recognize  the  authority 
of  St.  John  writing  somewhat  to  the  church,  and 
even  "  casts  out  of  the  Church  "  any  persons  who  do 
receive  St.  John's  representatives.  How  could 
Diotrephes  cast  brethren  out  of  the  Church  ?  Some 
have  thought  him  a  bad  specimen  of  diocesan  bishop 
of  the  new  order,  tyrannical  and  self-willed.  More 
probably  he  was  a  purse-proud  layman,  who  gave  his 
great  house  for  a  Christian  meeting-place,  and  then 
refused  admission  there  to  any  who  ventured  to  dif- 
fer seriously  from  him  in  Church  policy.  Such  an 
one    might   be   "  had   in    exceeding  honor,"  in   St. 


36  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Clement's  words,  while  really  he  ought  to  have  been 
"  little  in  the  flock  of  Christ,1'  and  was  in  serious 
danger  of  being  "  cast  out  from  the  hope  of  Him." 

But  of  course,  any  attempt  to  make  out  Diotrephes 
a  Corinthian  is  pure  conjecture.  One  thing,  how- 
ever, is  quite  certain.  St.  John  was  living  over 
across  the  iEgean  Sea  at  Ephesus,  when  this  trouble 
was  going  on  at  Corinth,  whether  his  letter  to 
Caius  refers  to  it,  or  no.  Why  did  he  not  settle  it 
at  once,  without  waiting  for  the  Church  of  the  Ro- 
mans to  give  any  views  on  the  subject?  Plainty, 
because  he  couldn't.  Whatever  the  trouble  at 
Corinth  may  have  been,  it  manifestly  included  an 
attempt  of  leading  laymen  to  get  a  larger  share  of 
local  self-government  than  was  generally  approved 
in  the  Church,  and  incidentally  a  refusal  to  submit 
to  any  direction  coming  from  the  one  survivor  of  the 
original  Apostles.  It  would  seem  pretty  plain  that 
even  in  those  early  days  there  were  two  parties  in 
the  Church,  one  party  magnifying  the  authority  of 
the  clergy  (and  particularly  of  the  Apostles  or 
Bishops,  as  we  shall  see  presently  in  the  letters  of 
Ignatius,  Bishop  of  Antioch),  and  devoted  to  the 
idea  of  one  great  world-wide  organization,  "the 
Catholic  Church,"  to  which  each  particular  group  of 
Christians  should  carefully  subordinate  itself,  the 
other  party,  perhaps  far-sighted  enough  to  see  a 
danger  to  Christian  liberty  in  such  an  organization, 
perhaps  only  disinclined  to  personal  subordination, 
but  either  way  eager  to  minimize  clerical  authority 
and  to  exalt  local  independence.  It  was  the  party 
of  clerical  authority  and  high  organization  that  pre- 


Qualities  of  St.  Clement's  Letter.  37 

vailed.  It  will  be  shown  in  a  later  chapter  (IV.) 
that  they  claimed  divine  authority  for  their  ideas. 
The  opposition  has  left  no  written  records.  We  can 
only  guess  whether  they  would  have  attempted  to 
show  that  this  was  a  mistake.  As  one  whose  sym- 
pathies are  strongly  with  Clement  and  Ignatius,  the 
present  writer  allows  himself  to  say  again  that  St. 
John  was  certainly  living  at  this  time.  We  cannot 
say  whether  he  would  have  sanctioned  all  the  argu- 
ments of  Clement,  or  all  the  impassioned  exhorta- 
tions of  Ignatius.  But  if  he  was  not  on  their  side 
in  the  main,  the  absence  of  any  particular  reference 
to  him  in  their  writings  is  unaccountable.  As  an 
opponent,  he  would  have  been  thrown  in  their  faces 
constantly,  and  they  would  have  had  to  show  how 
they  could  excuse  themselves  for  departing  from  his 
policy. 

(c)  We  come  now  to  the  qualities  of  the  writing 
itself.  It  has  been  suggested  already  that  it  was 
wise  and  tactful.  Written  to  urge  upon  the  Church 
of  Corinth  the  authority  of  the  clerical  body,  and 
that  in  case  of  any  difference  of  judgment  between 
clergy  and  laity  as  to  the  government  of  the  Church, 
the  laity  should  of  course  submit,  it  does  not  put 
forward  the  writer's  personality,  or  any  clerical 
authority  whatever,  but  addresses  the  Christian  body 
at  Corinth  with  the  voice  of  the  Church  of  the  Ro- 
mans, the  whole  Christian  Church  of  the  world's 
chief  city  pronouncing  thus  unitedly  against  the 
novelty  of  government  by  the  people  in  the  Church.1 

1  The  writer  of  this  volume  takes  the  liberty  of  saying  here 
that  he  himself  rejoices  greatly  in  the  "way  in  which  the  responsi- 


38  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Of  course  such  a  voice  was  the  only  one  that  the 
Corinthian  malecontents  would  listen  to.  There 
was  no  use  in  writing  to  them,  "I,  the  Roman 
Bishop,  think  thus  and  so."  "  The  whole  Church  of 
the  Romans  assures  you  that  it  holds  submission  to 
the  presbyters  to  be  a  duty,"  was  the  sort  of  state- 
ment that  would  have  weight.  That  Clement  put 
that  kind  of  thing  strongly,  the  quotations  already 
made  will  show.  It  is  right  to  note,  because  such 
language  sounds  so  very  strongly  in  modern  ears, 
that  he  was  not  putting  forward  a  new  scheme,  but 
repeating  the  phraseology  of  the  New  Testament. 
One  must  not  make  too  much  of  the  fact  that  the 
title  "Bishop"  means  "overseer."  It  did  not  al- 
ways mean  very  much  in  those  days.  But  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  the  clergy  as  "  those  who  are  over  you  "  in 
his  very  first  letter  (1  Thess.  v.  12),  and  as  "  rul- 
ing "  in  one  of  his  very  last  (1  Tim.  v.  17.  Cf.  iii. 
5,  where  "  ruling  well  "  in  one's  family  can  alone 
prepare  for  "  taking  care "  of  the  Church).  And 
another  word  for  "  ruling "  is  used  in  Heb.  xiii.  7, 
17,  24,  and  the  writer  of  that  letter  exhorts  his  read- 
ers to  "  obey  them  that  have  the  rule,"  and  to  be 
submissive  to  their  wish. 

Some  further  quotations  will  be  given  in  Chapter 
IV.  We  may  add  here  a  notice  of  three  characteristics 
of  Clement  as  a  writer,  specialty  remarked  by  Bishop 


bility  of  government  in  the  Church  of  Christ  has  actually  broad- 
ened down  from  Apostles  or  bishops  to  synods  including  presby- 
ters, and  again  to  such  assemblies  as  include  a  representation  of 
the  faithful  laity.  He  regards  it  as  a  most  healthy  and  providen- 
tial growth.  Only  he  is  quite  sure  that  the  Church  did  not  begin 
so,  and  could  not  healthily  have  begun  so. 


St.  Clements   Three   Characteristics.  39 

Liglitfoot.  They  are  comprehensiveness,  a  deep  sense 
of  order,  and  a  strong  man's  careful  moderation. 
Comprehensiveness  is  shown  not  only  in  quotations, 
sometimes  evidently  made  from  memory,  and  copious 
quotations  too,  from  all  parts  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  the  Septuagint  Greek  version,  and  from  St.  Paul's 
Epistles,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  St.  James,  and 
1  St.  Peter,  but  much  more  in  the  way  in  which  Clem- 
ent shows  himself  to  have  grasped  the  different  modes 
of  thought  of  the  New  Testament  writers  and  har- 
monized them  all  in  his  own  theology.  He  held  St. 
Paul's  doctrine  of  faith  and  St.  James's  doctrine  of 
works  in  happy  balance.  It  may  be  added,  that 
while  he  quotes  from  the  first  three  Gospels,  it  is 
not  clear  that  he  knew  any  writing  of  St.  John. 
Probably  such  had  not  had  time  to  reach  him.  The 
sense  of  order  was,  of  course,  particularly  drawn  out 
by  the  nature  of  the  argument  on  which  Clement 
was  engaged.  Still  it  appears  plainly  that  his  was  a 
mind  naturally  open  to  deep  impressions  of  the  order 
and  beauty  of  natural  law.  He  had  not  actual  sci- 
ence enough  to  save  him  from  believing  in  the  curi- 
ous fable  of  the  phoenix,  living  five  hundred  years, 
then  entering  the  fire  to  be  burned  up,  and  rising 
from  its  ashes  to  a  new  lease  of  life,  yet  he  had  the 
heart  of  the  modern  scientific  student  in  him.  He 
loved  the  study  of  the  reign  of  law.  But  nobler 
still  was  his  third  quality,  his  love  of  obedience  to 
law,  what  Bishop  Liglitfoot  calls  his  "  moderation, " 
his  deep  sense  of  the  value  of  self-restraint.  He  not 
only  preaches  moderation,  but  one  feels  his  practice 
of  it  in  these  lines.     "  Intense  moderation  "  is  one  of 


40  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

his  phrases,  and  a  fine  one  for  a  man  called  to  unite 
opposing  parties  and  lead  them  to  a  common  victory. 

It  remains  only  to  notice  that  this  Roman  Bishop's 
letter  was  written  in  Greek,  not  in  Latin.  "The 
Church  of  Rome,  and  most,  if  not  all  the  Churches 
of  the  West,"  says  Dean  Milman  {Latin  Christianity, 
Book  L,  Chapter  i.),  "  were,  if  we  may  so  speak, 
Greek  religious  colonies.  Their  language  was  Greek, 
their  organization  Greek,  their  writers  Greek,  their 
Scriptures  Greek  ;  and  many  vestiges  and  traditions 
show  that  their  ritual,  their  Liturgy,  was  Greek." 
Bishop  Westcott  {Canon  of  the  New  Testament,  pp. 
215,  etc.)  holds  that  the  Rome  of  those  days  was  so 
much  a  Greek  city  that  the  poorer  part  of  the  popu- 
lation were  largely  of  Greek  descent  and  mostly 
Greek  in  speech.  Not  before  the  middle  of  the  third 
century  did  Rome  come  to  be  the  centre  of  a  charac- 
teristically Latin  Christianity. 

4.  The  Shepherd  of  Hennas.  Does  anybody  now 
read  Bunyan's  Pilgrim's  Progress?  One  who  had  it 
among  the  joys  of  his  boyhood  must  feel  a  gentle 
pity  for  the  children  of  the  twentieth  century,  if 
they  are  not  to  have  the  same.  Surely,  the  elders 
will  remember  it.  It  was  a  book  of  books  among 
Protestant  readers  for  two  centuries  from  the  time 
when  it  was  written  by  a  tinker  turned  preacher, 
while  he  was  in  jail  for  preachings  which  were 
against  the  law.  Well,  very  much  such  a  book  was 
this  volume  called  The  Shepherd,  written  by  a  man 
named  Hennas,  an  ex-slave,  and  not  a  presbyter,  but 
apparently  a  gifted  lay-exhorter  in  the  Church  at 
Rome.     The  story  itself  is  not  a  bit  like  Bunj^an's. 


The  Shepherd  of  Hermas.  41 

The  likeness  is  simply  in  this,  that  both  books  teach 
large  portions  of  Christian  truth  in  the  form  of  alle- 
gory, and  with  a  long,  continuous  narrative  on  which 
the  allegorical  details  are  strung,  and  that  both  met 
a  want  and  achieved  an  immense  popularity  in  spite 
of  having  some  things  that  were  objectionable  in 
their  teaching  in  the  eyes  of  careful  theologians. 
Another  point  of  resemblance  is  that  both  writers 
were  of  the  Puritan  temper,  filled  with  bitterness 
because  of  the  Church's  corruption  and  worldliness, 
and  trusting  much  to  a  severe  external  discipline  to 
save  her. 

The  work  of  Hermas  is  divided  into  three  books, 
of  Visions,  Commandments,  and  Parables,  the  last  two 
being  commonly  quoted  under  the  titles  of  Mandates 
and  Similitudes.  In  the  Visions  he  sees  a  woman  to 
whom  he  had  once  been  a  slave,  complaining  against 
him  in  heaven  because  of  evil  thoughts  which  he 
had  had.  Later  he  sees  an  aged  woman  of  majestic 
appearance,  who  proves  to  be  the  Church,  her  snowy 
hair  indicating  that  she  has  existed  from  all  eternity 
in  the  mind  of  God.  He  learns  many  things  from 
her,  but  at  first  he  cannot  remember  them  after  the 
visions  are  over.  After  much  fasting  and  prayer  the 
visions  become  more  clear.  Then  in  the  last  of  them 
a  shepherd  appears  to  him, — "the  Shepherd  to  whose 
care  thou  wast  committed,"  Hermas  is  told.  It  is 
apparently  a  vision  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  that  is 
meant  to  be  conveyed,  but  the  only  description  that 
the  Shepherd  will  give  of  Himself  is  that  He  is  sent 
to  be  an  Angel  of  repentance  while  there  is  yet  time. 
It  is  this  Shepherd  who  gives  title  to  the  whole  work, 


42  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

and  it  is  He  who  makes  known  to  Hermas  the  twelve 
Commandments  and  ten  Parables  which  make  up  the 
two  remaining  books. 

Here  arises  a  question  of  some  difficulty.  Was  all 
this  strange  story  a  piece  of  self-delusion,  a  piece  of 
knavish  imposture,  or  simply  a  religious  novel,  like 
that  Pilgrim's  Progress  to  which  we  have  compared 
it?  This  last  is  perhaps  the  most  common  view,  but 
it  seems  the  least  historical.  For  two  hundred  years 
the  Shepherd  was  read  in  Christian  Churches  in  parts 
of  the  East  along  with  the  New  Testament.  It  is 
found  copied  along  with  the  Divine  Scriptures  in 
our  oldest  manuscript  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
famous  Codex  Sinaiticus.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  a 
learned  and  strong  man,  writing  his  Stromata,  or 
Miscellanies,  about  A.  D.  195,  quotes  "  the  Power 
that  spake  to  Hermas  by  revelation  "  as  speaking 
"  divinely."  The  still  greater  Alexandrine  scholar, 
Origen,  thought  it  was  inspired,  though  he  knew 
that  some  opposed  such  a  view.  In  the  West,  Ire- 
nseus  quotes  it  as  a  "  Scripture."  We  may  well  fol- 
low the  brilliant  Irish  scholar,  Doctor  Salmon,  and 
the  German,  Zahn,  in  the  idea  that  Hermas  really 
had  strange  dreams,  especially  after  much  fasting 
and  praying,  and  that  he  wrote  them  down  very 
honestly  and  believed  in  them  profoundly.  Also, 
we  need  not  think  him  a  mere  fool.  The  Church 
had  enjoyed  an  outburst  of  supernatural  powers, 
powers  sorely  needed  for  her  new  work.  Think  of 
it !  She  started  on  her  way  with  no  New  Testament 
books  yet  written,  no  commentaries  on  any  of  the 
Old  Testament  books,  no  prayer-books,  no  hymn- 


The  Prophets  of  the  First  Days.  4S 

books,  and  more  than  all  these,  no  snch  inherited 
habits  of  thought  as  Ave  Christians  of  to-day  are 
born  into.  Then  God  raised  up  "prophets"  in  the 
Christian  order,  and  they  prayed  and  preached  and 
taught  and  sang,  or  at  any  rate  produced  "  spiritual 
songs  "  for  the  Church  to  sing  as  soon  as  she  found 
her  voice,  and  all  this  they  did  by  inspirations  more 
special  than  we  can  easily  appreciate.  Many  a  stream 
of  religious  thought  or  feeling  that  flows  down  to 
our  day  looking  so  natural  that  we  simply  cannot 
imagine  Christian  people  not  thinking  thus  and  thus, 
or  feeling  so  and  so,  is  really  an  outcome  of  that 
wonderful  work  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  speaking  to 
the  rock  of  Jewish  hearts  or  heathen  hearts  that  now 
were  quarried  out  of  their  darkness  and  built  up 
into  a  Temple  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ.  When 
did  those  strange  fountains  begin  to  fail?  Just  as 
soon  as  the  Church's  natural  powers  had  grown  up 
enough  to  take  what  they  had  given  and  go  on  with- 
out them,  doubtless.  How  far  that  process  had  gone 
in  the  days  of  Hernias,  we  cannot  tell.  He  seems  to 
have  thought  sincerely  that  he  was  a  man  of  super- 
natural gifts.  It  is  well-nigh  certain  that  he  had 
known  such  men,  and  many  of  them.  It  would  be 
rash  to  say  that  because  his  writings  are  not  of  eter- 
nal value,  therefore  they  could  not  have  been  a 
supernatural  gift  to  the  Church  in  the  day  of  them. 
God  does  give  the  Church  much  help  in  every  age 
through  men  whom  God  does  not  keep  perfectly  safe 
from  error.  Hernias  seems  to  be  just  on  the  border- 
line between  the  inspired  "  prophets "  of  the  New 
Testament,  who    did  not   always   show  good   judg- 


44  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

ment,  to  be  sure,  or  use  good  behavior,  according 
to  Saint  Paul's  first  letter  to  the  Corinthians,  and 
the  fanatic  and  conceited  Christians  of  later  da}rs, 
who  indulge  in  many  undisciplined  fancies  and 
count  thern  all  to  be  deliverances  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
We  have  said  that  the  Church  took  Hermas  seri- 
ously. Certainly  he  took  himself  seriously.  It 
comes  out  in  the  way  in  which  lie  mixes  in  his 
visions  his  own  troubles  and  the  Church's  needs. 
An  impostor  would  have  written  only  what  he 
wanted  to  impress  on  the  Church's  mind,  with  per- 
haps some  compliments  for  himself.  Hermas,  like 
all  dreamers,  dreams  about  his  own  affairs,  his  scold- 
ing wife,  and  his  unruly  and  ungrateful  children, 
and  his  wasted  property,  as  well  as  about  the  condi- 
tions of  the  Church,  which  he  made  heartily  his  own 
concern  too.  There  was  more  of  himself  in  his 
dreams  than  he  thought  there  was,  but  doubtless 
God  gave  them  to  him  in  a  very  real  sense,  and 
made  them  useful  to  the  Church,  also.  If,  then,  we 
take  him  for  an  honest  man,  telling  truly  of  dreams 
which  he  had  really  dreamed,  what  is  his  date  and 
the  setting  of  his  life  ?  He  gives  us  one  clear  indi- 
cation. He  was  told  in  a  vision  to  make  two  copies 
of  his  book,  and  give  one  to  Grapte,  presumably  a 
deaconess,  and  one  to  Clement,  who  would  send  it  to 
the  Churches  abroad.  This  Clement  can  hardly  be 
other  than  the  one  whose  letter  to  a  foreign  Church 
had  already  won  such  honor,  and  who  as  bishop 
(though  Hermas  never  speaks  of  any  one  being 
bishop,)  of  the  Roman  Church  would  naturally  pass 
judgment  on  the  claims  of  persons  professing  to  be 


Hernias,  the  Brother  of  Pius.  45 

prophets,  and  also  send  out  anything  that  was 
thought  worthy  to  be  sent  abroad,  as  bearing  the 
stamp  of  the  Roman  Christians'  approval.  We  con- 
clude, then,  that  Hernias  wrote  before  the  death  of 
Clement,  or  but  little  after,  and  that  Clement,  or 
his  successor,  Evarestus,  really  did  send  out  this 
book  with  the  commendation  of  the  Church  at  Rome. 
How  natural  that  while  his  dreams  were  regarded  by 
all  as  God-given,  his  book  seems  to  have  had  more 
vogue  in  the  East,  where  no  one  knew  him,  than  in 
Rome,  where  people  knew  him  well. 

It  should  be  said,  however,  that  there  is  an  old  bit 
of  manuscript,  known  from  the  scholar  who  found  it 
in  an  Italian  monastery  library  as  the  Muratorian 
Fragment^  which  distinctly  says  that  the  Shepherd 
"  was  written  very  lately,  in  our  own  times,  in  the 
city  of  Rome,  by  Hermas,  when  his  brother,  the 
bishop  Pius,  was  occupying  the  chair  of  the  Church 
of  the  city  of  Rome."  This  manuscript  fragment 
is  from  a  copy  made  by  an  extraordinarily  blundering 
scribe,  and  it  seems  to  represent  a  very  bad  transla- 
tion into  Latin  from  a  Greek  original,  which  may 
have  been  written — Doctor  Salmon  gives  reason  for 
thinking  so  (Article  Hermas,  Dictionary  of  Chris- 
tian Biography) — some  sixty  years  after  the  death 
of  Pius,  which  must  be  placed  about  A.  D.  153.  If 
"  sixty  years  since  "  does  not  seem  to  us  "  very  lately," 
it  should  be  noted  that  Eusebius  speaks  of  events  that 
happened  more  than  sixty  years  before  he  was  writing 
as  "in  our  own  times,"  and  that  Ireneeus  tells  of  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John  as  being  seen  "almost  in  our 
own  times,  in  the  reign  of  Domitian,"  meaning  be- 


46  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tween  eighty  and  ninety  years  before  he  wrote.  At 
that  distance  of  time  the  writer  of  the  Greek  state- 
ment may  have  made  a  mistake,  or  it  may  well  be 
that  he  really  wrote  "  by  Hermas  vjhose  brother  Pius,1' 
not  at  all  "  by  Hermas  when  his  brother  Pius,"  "  was 
occupying  the  chair."  Perhaps  the  two  men  were 
brothers,  but  the  book  of  one  forty  }^ears  earlier  than 
the  bishopric  of  the  other.  Perhaps  the  writer  of 
the  statement  simply  blundered.  One  thing  is  cer- 
tain. The  credit  of  Hermas  ran  down  remarkably 
in  the  Western  Church  soon  after  this  writing  of 
some  influential  scholar  was  put  forth.  The  Church 
of  the  decade  A.  D.  210-220  seems  to  have  become 
persuaded  that  a  book  which  had  been  honored 
as  containing  real  revelations  given  before  A.  D. 
100,  was  really  a  work  of  fiction  written  some  fifty 
years  later.  Which  opinion  are  we  to  follow  ?  Surely 
the  book  never  could  have  obtained  its  early  credit, 
and  been  quoted  by  Irenseus  as  "  Scripture,"  if  it  was 
really  a  work  of  fiction,  written  within  one  generation 
before  the  visit  of  Irenseus  to  Rome.  And  cer- 
tainly if  the  book  did  first  appear  after  A.  D.  140, 
no  Church  was  going  to  believe  that  a  man  had  been 
bidden  in  a  heavenly  vision  to  go  to  Clement,  forty 
years  after  Clement  was  dead.  We  may  place  Her- 
mas about  A.  D.  100,  with  Zahn,  and  Salmon,  and 
our  own  Doctor  Schaff,  though  a  greater  number  of 
scholars  are  still  on  the  side  of  the  later  date. 

5.  The  Epistles  of  Ignatius  of  Antioch .  These  are 
seven  letters  written  by  Ignatius,  Bishop  of  the  great 
city  of  Antioch  in  Syria,  while  he  was  on  his  way  to 
Rome  to  suffer  a  martyr's  death,  having  been  con- 


Ignatius  of  Antioch.  47 


denmed  to  be  thrown  to  the  wild  beasts  in  the  Fla- 
vian Amphitheatre,  known  to  us  as  the  Colosseum. 
His  guards  had  conveyed  him  to  Smyrna  by  a  road 
that  led  through  the  cities  of  Laodicea,  Philadelphia 
and  Sardis,  and  at  Philadelphia  at  any  rate  he  was 
allowed  to  address  the  Christians  in  a  religious  as- 
sembly, and  to  receive  kindness  from  them.  At 
Smyrna  there  was,  apparently,  some  considerable 
stay.  Here  the  Christians  and  their  bishop,  Poly- 
carp,  a  great  name  also,  showed  abounding  love  and 
respect  for  Christ's  martyr  on  his  way  to  glory. 
Here  also  he  received  delegates  from  three  cities 
lying  on  another  road,  the  great  Church  of  Ephesus 
sending  its  bishop,  Onesimus,  a  deacon,  and  three 
other  persons,  Magnesia  its  bishop,  Damas,  youthful, 
but  most  admirable,  with  two  presbyters  and  a  dea- 
con, and  the  more  distant  Tralles  its  bishop,  Poly- 
bius,  alone.  From  Smyrna,  therefore,  Ignatius  dic- 
tated letters  of  thanks  and  solemn  exhortation  to 
each  of  these  Churches,  as  well  as  a  letter  to  the 
Church  in  Rome,  chiefly  concerned  with  an  impas- 
sioned entreaty  not  to  attempt  anything  towards  se- 
curing his  escape  from  death,  and  so  to  endanger  his 
crown.  Passing  on  then  to  Troas,  his  last  stopping- 
place  on  Asiatic  soil,  he  dictated  to  the  Ephesian 
deacon,  Burrhus,  who  had  been  commissioned  to  go 
with  him  and  be  a  helper  to  him  in  the  name  of  the 
two  Churches  of  Ephesus  and  Smyrna,  three  more 
letters,  one  to  the  Church  in  Philadelphia,  one  to 
that  of  Smyrna,  and  one  to  the  saintly  Polycarp. 
By  a  letter  of  Polycarp's  we  know  that  Ignatius  was 
taken  to  Philippi,  was  lovingly  received  there  by  the 


48  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Church,  which  wrote  to  Poly  carp  to  beg  for  copies 
of  any  letters  written  by  the  martyr,  and  was  joined 
by  a  group  of  Christians  condemned,  like  himself,  to 
die. 

The  story  of  the  remaining  journey  and  of  the 
matyrdom  itself  comes  to  us  in  forms  quite  too  late 
and  legendary  to  be  of  any  value ;  but  it  was  a 
popular  story,  so  popular  that  a  somewhat  unortho- 
dox writer  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century, 
wishing  to  impress  certain  views  of  his  own  upon 
the  Church  of  his  day,  took  up  the  letters  of  Igna- 
tius and  rewrote  them  with  large  additions,  adding 
six  letters  made  entirely  out  of  his  own  head  besides, 
and  published  the  whole  collection  as  the  work  of 
the  martyr.  The  forgery  never  made  much  way  in 
the  East,  but  in  the  West  it  was  very  popular  before 
the  Reformation,  and  the  genuine  form  of  the  letters 
was  lost  to  view.  Hence  came  a  long  and  bitter 
controversy  among  Post-Reformation  scholars,  espe- 
cially after  the  rediscovery  of  the  letters  in  the 
shorter  edition.  Which  was  the  genuine  form  of  the 
Ignatian  writings  ?  Was  any  reliance  to  be  placed 
on  any  form  of  what  had  been  so  manifestly  a  play- 
thing of  pious  forgery  ?  The  discovery  and  publica- 
tion in  1845  of  a  Syriac  copy  of  the  letters,  contain- 
ing only  three,  and  those  in  much  briefer  form, 
seemed  for  a  while  to  point  to  the  view  that  here  at 
last  we  had  the  genuine  Ignatius,  but  Bishop  Light- 
foot's  great  edition,  published  in  1885,  is  now  gener- 
ally accepted  as  putting  an  end  to  controversy,  and 
establishing  what  he  calls  "  the  middle  form,"  the 
"  Short  Greek  "  edition  of  the  letters,  as  a  genuine 


Date  of  Ignatius.     His   Character.  49 

product  of  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  century. 
Twenty  years  ago  it  was  quite  the  fashion  of  eminent 
scholars  to  say  that  it  was  entirely  uncertain  what 
Ignatius  really  wrote.  To-day  quotations  may  be 
made  securely  from  the  Lightfoot  text. 

The  story  of  the  martyrdom,  we  have  said,  is 
worthless.  All  that  we  know  of  the  man  we  must 
draw  from  the  letters  themselves  and  from  that  of 
Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  save  for  the  scanty  notices  in 
Eusebius,  who  tells  us  that  Ignatius  was  the  second 
Bishop  of  Antioch,  and  in  his  "  Chronicle  "  notes  the 
martyrdom  in  a  sort  of  appendix  to  his  treatment  of 
the  four-year  period  A.  D.  103-106.  Possibly  Euse- 
bius himself  did  not  regard  that  date  as  more  than 
somewhere  about  right.  Lightfoot  would  place  the 
story  anywhere  between  one  hundred  and  one  hun- 
dred and  eighteen.  Professor  Harnack,  whose  great 
influence  had  long  held  down  the  balance  of  scholar- 
ship on  the  side  of  a  date  twenty  years  later  than 
Lightfoot's  latest,  has  lately  pronounced  in  favor  of 
one  "not  later  than  A.  D.  125."  Such  a  combina- 
tion of  scholars  will  go  far  to  fix  scholarly  opinion. 

But  the  man  is  what  one  may  call  a  vivid  char- 
acter. In  his  letters  he  cannot  be  hid.  In  Clement 
of  Rome  we  have  a  strong  man  using  all  his  power 
to  keep  himself  patient  and  gentle,  well  balanced 
and  therefore  moderate.  In  Ignatius  of  Antioch  we 
have  a  strong  man  rushing  into  action,  giving  him- 
self out  on  every  side,  greatly  admiring  self-restraint 
in  others,  as  when  he  writes  of  the  Bishop  of  Tralles 
that  "  his  gentleness  is  power,"  but  not  very  much 
practising  it.     Clement  is  cool  and  calm.     Ignatius 


50  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

is  dashing  and  fiery.  The  very  name  suggested  to 
some  in  later  days  the  Latin  word  ignis,  "  a  fire." 
The  derivation  is  absurd  enough,  but  the  suggestion 
is  delightfully  appropriate.  In  his  personal  char- 
acter he  was  a  man  of  passionate  devotion,  a  man  to 
whom  Jesus  Christ  is  intensely  real.  "  Nothing  visi- 
ble is  good,"  he  writes  to  the  Roman  Christians, 
speaking  of  his  feeling  that  his  own  Christian  char- 
acter will  not  be  safe  till  he  himself  is  no  more  seen. 
"  Nothing  visible  is  good.  For  our  God,  Jesus 
Christ,  being  in  the  Father  is  more  plainly  visible." 
The  invisible  Saviour  is  to  him  more  manifest  than 
any  of  "  the  things  which  do  appear."  There  appears 
in  him  also  a  passionate  self-depreciation.  He  is 
"the  least"  of  the  Christians  at  Antioch.  He  is 
"one  born  out  of  due  time,"  like  Saint  Paul.  He 
goes  to  his  martyrdom  with  trembling  joy,  assured 
that  if  no  powerful  friends  intercede  for  him  at 
Rome,  if  God  allows  him  to  suffer  for  the  testimony 
of  Jesus,  it  will  be  a  sign  that  in  spite  of  all  that  is 
past,  he  is  a  man  accepted.  Making  all  allowance 
for  Oriental  fervor  and  the  tendency  to  imitate  St. 
Paul,  we  may  feel  with  Lightfoot  that  there  really 
had  been,  as  with  St.  Paul,  "  something  violent, 
dangerous,  and  unusual  in  his  spiritual  nativity." 
"  His  was  one  of  those  broken  natures,  out  of  which, 
as  Zahn  has  truly  said,  God's  heroes  are  made.  If 
not  a  persecutor  of  Christ,  if  not  a  foe  to  Christ,  as 
seems  probable,  he  had  at  least  been  for  a  consider- 
able portion  of  his  life  an  alien  from  Christ.  Like 
St.  Paul,  like  Augustine,  like  Francis  Xavier,  like 
Luther,  like  John  Bunyan,  he  could  not  forget  that 


Iynatian  Phrases  and  Figures.  51 

his  had  been  a  dislocated  life ;  and  the  memory  of 
the  catastrophe  which  had  shattered  his  former  self, 
filled  him  with  awe  and  thanksgiving,  and  fanned 
the  fervor  of  his  devotion  to  a  white  heat." 

A  vivid  character  we  have  called  him,  and  he 
writes  vividly.  He  is  one  of  the  most  quotable  of 
men.  He  has  phrases  that  are  like  the  sudden  light- 
ing of  a  room.  Such,  I  think,  are  his  description  of 
the  Church  in  Rome,  the  world's  great  secular  cap- 
ital, as  "having  the  presidency  of  love,"  and  of  the 
bishop  of  Tralles,  as  one  "whose  demeanor  is  a  great 
lesson,  and  his  gentleness  is  power."  Such  are  these 
that  follow  :  "  Near  the  sword,  near  to  God "  ; 
"  Christianity  is  a  thing  of  might,  whensoever  it  is 
hated  by  the  world "  ;  "  He  that  truly  possesseth 
the  word  of  Jesus  is  able  also  to  hearken  unto  His 
silence";  "Mark  the  seasons.  Look  for  Him  that 
is  above  every  season  " ;  "  Bear  all  men,  as  the  Lord 
beareth  thee."  His  letters  abound  in  metaphors, 
and  not  merely  of  the  common  stock  either.  His 
eager  mind  seems  to  have  turned  everything  he  saw 
to  good  account,  to  illustrate  the  Christian  life  and 
warfare.  He  writes  to  exhort  Polycarp  to  firmness, 
and  his  word  is  "  Stand  like  an  anvil  when  it  is 
smitten."  False  teachers  are  described  as  "  sowing 
the  seed  "  of  their  pernicious  doctrine,  which  again 
is  likened  to  "  noxious  herbs."  True  Christians  are 
"branches  of  the  Cross,1  and  their  fruit  imperish- 

1  Early  Christians  thought  of  the  Cross  as  a  tree  (cf.  1  St.  Peter 
ii.  24),  because  the  Greek  tongue  used  one  word  for  "wood,"  "a 
tree,"  or  "a  timber."  They  loved  to  find  the  Cross  in  the  "  tree 
planted  by  the  waterside  "  of  Ps.  i.  and  in  the  tree  of  Exodus  xv. 
25,  which  made  the  waters  of  Ma  rah  sweet. 


52  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

able."  He  sees  a  festival  procession  on  its  way  to 
some  heathen  temple,  and  it  suggests  to  him  a  de- 
scription of  the  Church  to  which  he  is  writing,  as 
"  companions  in  the  way,  carrying  your  God  and 
your  shrines  [he  was  writing  to  Ephesus,  where  the 
making  of  little  shrines  was  a  great  trade,  we  know, 
fifty  years  before,  and  he  means  that  each  Christian's 
body  is  a  shrine  more  precious  than  a  heathen  crafts- 
man can  understand],  your  Christ  and  your  holy 
things,  being  arrayed  from  head  to  foot  in  the  com- 
mandments of  Jesus  Christ."  Again,  he  writes  to 
the  Romans,  "  I  am  God's  wheat,  and  I  am  ground  by 
the  teeth  of  beasts,  that  I  may  be  found  pure  bread 
of  Christ."  In  the  same  letter  he  plays  on  words 
with  the  same  spirit  of  looking  everywhere  for  ma- 
terial for  a  Christian  thought.  He  would  have  the 
Roman  Christians  sing  praise  to  God,  for  vouchsafing 
that  the  bishop  of  Syria  should  be  found  in  the  West 
[in  Greek,  "the  setting  land"],  having  summoned 
him  from  the  East  [in  Greek,  "  the  sunrise-land." 
Cf.  our  "Occident"  and  "  Orient"].  It  is  good  to 
set  from  the  world  unto  God,  that  I  may  rise  unto 
Him." 

Two  groups  of  the  illustrations  of  Ignatius  de- 
serve special  attention.  In  five  of  the  seven  letters 
are  found  eleven  illustrations  drawn  from  medical 
practice,  and  two  more  that  may  have  had  that 
origin.  None  of  them  are  such  as  might  not  have 
been  thought  of  by  a  man  who  had  never  studied 
medicine,  but  the  number  and  the  variety  of  them 
makes  me  think  that  there  was  some  special  reason 
why  this  many-sided  man,  who  found  in  the  world 


A  Medical  Man  and  Musical.  53 

bo  many  symbols  of  spiritual  facts  and  forces,  found 
more  in  the  lines  most  familiar  to  a  medical  man 
than  in  any  other.  One  may  suspect  that  he  was  once 
a  physician  of  the  body,  like  St.  Luke,  before  ever 
he  knew  the  healing  of  the  soul.  Again,  there  are 
in  four  of  the  seven  letters  six  musical  illustrations, 
of  which  we  will  read  two,  as  they  occur  together  in 
chapter  four  of  the  letter  to  the  Ephesian  Church. 
44  So  then  it  becometh  you  to  run  in  harmony  with 
the  mind  of  the  bishop,  which  thing  also  ye  do. 
For  your  honorable  presbytery,  which  is  worthy  of 
God,  is  attuned  to  the  bishop,  even  as  its  strings  to 
a  lyre.  Therefore  in  your  concord  and  harmonious 
love  Jesus  Christ  is  sung.  And  do  ye,  each  and  all, 
form  yourselves  into  a  chorus,  that  being  harmo- 
nious in  concord,  and  taking  the  keynote  of  God,  ye 
may  as  the  result  of  unity  sing  with  one  voice 
through  Jesus  Christ  unto  the  Father." l  The 
figure  of  the  lyre  and  its  strings  may  have  been  a 
commonplace.  No  one  could  have  written  that 
carefully  exact  passage  about  the  chorus,  taking  its 
pitch  from  God,  unless  he  were  somewhat  of  a 
musician.     There  is  a  legend  that  our  Ignatius  had 

*I  commonly  use  Bishop  Lightfoot's  admirable  translation. 
Here  I  must  depart  from  it,  for  be  gives  "in  unison,"  where  I 
have  felt  obliged  to  say  "as  the  result  of  unity."  The  great 
bishop  of  Durham  seems  not  to  have  known  that  when  people 
were  singing  in  harmony,  they  could  not  be  singing  in  unison. 
Certainly  Ignatius's  figure  of  a  chorus  singing  different  notes  but 
making  a  beautiful  aud  agreeable  result,  is  a  nobler  illustration 
of  diverse  views  and  diverse  temperaments  held  together  in  the 
unity  of  the  Spirit,  than  the  picture  of  a  chorus  all  singing  the 
very  same  notes  would  be.  The  music  of  the  Church  Catholic  is 
harmony,  the  music  of  those  who  differ,  yet  agree.  Unison-sing- 
ing is  the  music  of  a  mere  sect,  or  section,  consisting  of  people 
who  happen  to  think  alike. 


54  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

a  heavenly  vision  of  angels  singing  in  responsive 
choirs,  and  that  he  at  once  introduced  antiphonal 
chanting  into  his  Church  at  Antioch,  from  which  it 
spread  over  the  Christian  world.  Such  singing  was 
no  new  thing  in  the  Church  when  Ignatius  died. 
The  Roman  governor  Pliny  heard  of  it  in  Bithynia, 
in  112,  as  a  custom  of  a  still  earlier  day.  Heathens 
and  Jews  had  used  it  before  Christianity  was  born. 
Still  some  one  must  have  been  the  first  to  adapt  it 
to  Christian  use,  and  Ignatius  had  the  restless  energy 
which  makes  men  innovators.  At  any  rate  he  may 
safely  be  set  down  as  the  first  known  patron  of 
Church  music.  It  is  plain  that  his  emotional  nature 
was  particularly  impressible  through  that  divine  art.1 

We  have  given  large  room  to  this  intense  Igna- 
tius, but  we  have  yet  to  bring  in  his  two  chief  in- 
tensities after  all.  They  were  his  passion  for  mar- 
tyrdom and  his  passion  for  the  unity  of  the  Church. 

(1)  Of  the  passion  for  martyrdom  we  need  only 
note  that  it  is  there.  "  I  dread  your  very  love,"  he 
writes  to  the  Romans,  "lest  it  do  me  an  injury." 
He  is  so  afraid  that  they  will  get  a  pardon  for  him, 
or  a  commutation  of  his  death-sentence.  "I  exhort 
you,  be  ye  not  an  unseasonable  kindness  to  me.  Let 
me  be  given  to  the  wild  beasts,  for  through  them  I 
can  attain  unto  God."  This  passion  has  been  called 
"  exaggerated,"  but  surely  it  is  lovable.     It  is  not  a 


'When  Tbeodoret  in  his  Church  History,  written  about  A.  D. 
440,  ascribed  the  introduction  of  antiphonal  singing  to  Diodore 
and  Flavian,  laymen  of  Antioch,  about  A.  D.  350,  he  must  have 
been  relying  on  a  story  of  something  which  they  really  did  for 
the  improvement  of  such  music,  with  an  appended  statement  that 
it  was  first  introduced  in  that  city. 


The  Passion  for   Unity.  55 

passion  of  arrogance,  reaching  after  a  great  place  in 
the  Kingdom.  It  is  a  passion  of  gratitude,  of  devo- 
tion, of  humility.  "  Though  I  desire  to  suffer,"  he 
writes  to  the  Trallians,  "I  know  not  if  I  am 
worthy."  It  is  in  the  same  spirit  that  he  says  to  the 
Romans  again,  "  If  ye  be  silent  and  leave  me  alone, 
I  am  a  word  of  God  ;  but  if  ye  desire  my  flesh, 
then  shall  I  be  again  a  mere  cry."  He  feels  that  all 
his  preaching  past  has  been  comparatively  poor  and 
unfruitful,  "  the  voice  of  one  crying,"  no  more,  but 
if  he  becomes  a  martyr,  that  will  be  a  preaching 
effective  to  the  last  degree.  Surely  he  was  right. 
Martyrs'  deaths  have  always  been  fruitful  of  new 
life  in  the  Church,  and  a  man  has  a  right  to  be  glad 
if  he  sees  a  prospect  before  him  that  he  will  be  sown 
as  the  seed  of  a  divine  harvest. 

(2)  Ignatius  longed  for  martyrdom,  largely  be- 
cause the  Church's  very  life  was  endangered,  and  he 
felt  that  the  deaths  of  some  of  her  most  valued  sons 
would  add  vastly  to  her  power.  The  same  condi- 
tions of  danger  and  conflict  inspired  in  him  his  other 
great  passion,  the  passion  for  unity.  He  felt  that  a 
house  divided  against  itself  must  fall.  He  had  the 
Lord's  own  word  for  it,  and  it  was  the  dictate  of 
sanctified  common-sense  as  well.  And  yet  the  wills 
and  affections  of  sinful  men  are  unruly,  and  the 
Church  on  earth  always  consists  of  sinful  men  gath- 
ered around  the  Divine  Head.  In  St.  Paul's  day 
there  was  real  danger  that  the  Church  of  Corinth 
would  go  to  pieces.  In  Ignatius's  day  he  saw  the 
same  danger  everywhere.  If  the  early  Church  had 
been  taught  the  modern  theory,  that  denominational 


56  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

rivalry  is  a  good  thing,  it  would  have  been  divided 
hopelessly  before  the  end  of  the  first  century.  Ig- 
natius believed  that  such  division  was  as  bad  as 
"  desertion  in  the  face  of  the  enemy,"  a  crime  whose 
penalty  is  death.  Nothing  short  of  careful  reading 
of  the  letters  as  a  whole  will  give  an  adequate  idea 
of  the  way  in  which  unity  is  dwelt  on  all  through. 
"  It  is  therefore  profitable  for  you  to  be  in  blameless 
unit}^,  that  ye  may  also  be  partakers  of  God  always  " 
(Eph.  iv.).  "  I  sing  the  praise  of  the  Churches,  and 
I  pray  that  there  may  be  in  them  union  of  the  flesh 
and  of  the  spirit,  which  are  Jesus  Christ's,  our  never- 
failing  life,  a  union  of  faith  and  love,  which  is  above 
all  things,  and  what  is  more  than  all,  a  union  with 
Jesus  and  the  Father  "  (Magnes.  i.).  "  He  that  is 
within  the  sanctuary  is  clean  ;  but  he  that  is  without 
the  sanctuaiy  is  not  clean, — that  is,  he  that  doeth 
aught  without  the  bishop  and  presbytery  and  deacons, 
this  man  is  not  clean  in  his  conscience  "  (Trail,  vii.). 
"  Shun  divisions  as  the  beginning  of  evils.  Do  ye 
all  follow  your  bishop,  as  Jesus  Christ  followed  the 
Father,  and  the  presbytery  as  the  Apostles,  and  to 
the  deacons  pay  respect,  as  to  God's  commandment. 
Let  no  man  do  aught  of  things  pertaining  to  the 
Church  apart  from  the  bishop.  Let  that  be  held  a 
valid  Eucharist  which  is  under  the  bishop  or  one  to 
whom  he  shall  have  committed  it.  Wheresoever  the 
bishop  shall  appear,  there  let  the  people  be ;  even  as 
where  Jesus  may  be,  there  is  the  Catholic  Church.1 

irThis  is  the  first  appearance  of  this  phrase  in  Christian  litera- 
ture. Lightfoot  translates  "universal"  rather  than  "Catholic," 
on  the  ground  that  the  phrase  was  not  yet  technical.  See  his  in- 
teresting note. 


Mutual  Duties  of  Bishop  and  Church.  57 

It  is  not  lawful  apart  from  the  bishop  to  baptize,  or 
hold  a  love-feast ;  but  whatever  he  shall  approve,  this 
is  well-pleasing  also  to  God  ;  that  everything  which 
ye  do  may  be  sure  and  valid  "  (Smyrn.  viii.). 

It  is  the  natural  outgrowth  of  this  feeling  of  the 
overpowering  necessity  for  unity,  that  Ignatius 
should  be  as  intense  in  preaching  submission  to 
leadership,  and  ultimately  to  one  leader,  the  bishop, 
as  the  responsible  head  of  each  Church.  The 
Church's  unity  is  to  Ignatius  an  arch,  of  which  the 
bishop  is  the  keystone.  Displace  that  uniting  force 
of  central  authority,  and  the  whole  structure  of 
God's  Temple  on  earth  is  endangered.  So  he  writes 
to  Polycarp,  "  Have  a  care  for  unity,  than  which 
nothing  is  better "  ;  and  then,  as  illustrating  the 
method  of  this  unity,  "  Let  nothing  be  done  without 
thy  consent ;  neither  do  thou  anything  without  the 
consent  of  God  "  (Pol.  i.,  iv.).  It  would  be  grossly 
unfair  to  Ignatius  not  to  point  out  that  he  has  a  doc- 
trine of  unity  for  the  bishop  too.  Not  only  must  he 
do  nothing  "  without  the  consent  of  God,"  but  he 
must  consult  his  presbyters  and  consider  the  wishes 
of  his  people.  The  relation  of  bishop  and  diocese 
is  like  the  relation  of  husband  and  wife.  Bishop, 
clergy,  and  laity  must  consult  together  freely,  con- 
sider one  another  fully,  give  up  to  one  another  gen- 
erously. Only,  when  there  is  a  question  of  the 
common  good,  and  a  difference  of  judgment  which 
cannot  be  resolved,  some  final  authority  must  decide. 
The  modern  view  says,  "  The  majority."  Ignatius 
says,  "  The  divinely  appointed  head."  He  can 
hardly  find  words  too  strong.     "  Be  obedient  to  the 


58  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

bishop  and  to  one  another,  as  Jesus  Christ  was  to  the 
Father,  and  as  the  Apostles  were  to  Christ  and  to 
the  Father,  that  there  may  be  union  both  of  flesh 
and  spirit"  (Magnes.  xii.).  "When  ye  are  obedi- 
ent to  the  bishop  as  to  Jesus  Christ,  it  is  evident  to 
me  that  ye  are  living  not  after  men,  but  after  Jesus 
Christ "  (Trail,  ii.).  "  As  many  as  are  of  God  and 
of  Jesus  Christ,  they  are  with  the  bishop."  .  .  . 
"  It  was  the  preaching  of  the  Spirit,  who  spake  on 
this  wise  :  Do  nothing  without  the  bishop  "  (Philad. 
iii.  7.). 

One  wonders  what  Ignatius  would  have  said,  if  he 
could  have  been  told  that  a  time  was  coming  when 
the  Church  would  be  so  strong  that  it  would  be 
thought  wiser  to  have  many  divisions  of  it,  all  inde- 
pendent Churches,  each  aiming  at  a  catholic  exten- 
sion over  the  others'  ground.  He  speaks  of  himself 
in  quaint  phrase  as  "a  man  composed  unto  union." 
Let  that  be  our  last  thought  of  the  martyr  bishop, 
as  we  pass  on  our  way. 

6.  With  the  letters  of  Ignatius  is  most  closely 
connected  The  Epistle  of  St..  Polycarp  to  the  Philip- 
pians.  We  have  seen  that  the  Church  of  Philippi 
sent  a  letter  to  Polycarp  asking  for  copies  of  any 
letters  written  by  Ignatius.  That  letter  is  lost,  but 
we  possess  the  bishop  of  Smyrna's  reply.  It  is  a 
good  practical  exhortation,  without  very  much  that 
is  notable  in  it  save  its  earnestness.  An  exhortation 
to  obey  the  presbyters  and  deacons  makes  it  prob- 
able that  Philippi  had  not  at  that  time  a  local  bishop. 
There  is  mention  of  a  presbyter,  Valens,  and  his 
wife,   as   having  disgraced  the   Christian  name   by 


Lost   Writings  of  Papias.  59 

some  sin  springing  from  the  evil  root  of  love  of 
money.  "  Be  ye,  therefore,  yourselves  also  sober 
therein,"  is  his  charitable  comment,  "and  hold  not 
such  as  enemies  [he  seems  to  have  2  Thess.  iii.  15 
in  his  mind],  but  restore  them  as  frail  and  erring 
members,  that  ye  may  save  the  whole  body  of  you." 
With  this  is  often  printed  the  letter  of  the  Church 
of  Smyrna  to  the  Church  of  Philomelium,  giving  an 
account  of  St.  Polycarp's  noble  death,  but  that  be- 
longs to  the  middle  of  the  second  century  and  to  a 
later  chapter  of  this  book. 

We  have  now  taken  a  view  of  Eusebius's  Ecclesi- 
astical History  and  of  all  the  Christian  writings  that 
have  come  down  to  us  which  any  scholars  of  repute 
now  date  between  75  and  125.  It  may  be  interest- 
ing to  mention  the  few  little  scraps  of  the  writings 
of  Papias,  bishop  of  Hierapolis,  once  a  pupil  of  St. 
John  the  Evangelist,  who  wrote  an  Exposition  of  the 
Oracles  of  the  Lord,  and  who  being  a  "  Chiliast," 
which  is  something  like  a  modern  "  Adventist,"  got 
the  reputation  in  later  times  of  being  "  a  man  of  slen- 
der intelligence,"  losing  credit  so  much  that  very 
little  of  his  has  come  down  to  us,  and  again  the  so- 
called  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome,  which 
is  neither  Clement's  nor  an  Epistle,  but  the  first 
Christian  sermon  which  has  come  to  us,  being  prob- 
ably a  homily  delivered  in  the  Corinthian  Church 
about  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  so 
highly  esteemed  that  it  was  copied  into  a  manuscript 
along  with  the  real  letter  of  Clement,  to  be  read  in 
Church,  as  that  was,  from  time  to  time;  but  these  fall 
outside  of  our  limit,  and  do  not  throw  light  oft  our 


60  The  Post-AjDostolic  Age. 

early  questions.  There  is  also  a  Letter  to  Diognetus, 
which  is  often  printed  among  the  writings  of  the 
Apostolic  Fathers,  but  it  is  probably  to  be  dated  as 
late  as  170  or  thereabouts,  and  though  a  fine  state- 
ment in  defense  of  Christianity,  it  has  no  place  here. 
The  object  of  this  chapter  has  been  to  make  the  chief 
sources  for  the  history  of  the  Post- Apostolic  Church 
in  the  period  most  critically  important  and  most 
clouded  by  controversy,  familiar  enough  to  be  some- 
thing more  than  mere  names,  when  anywhere  the 
reader  encounters  a  quotation  from  any  of  them. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE   HISTORIC   EPISCOPATE:      RIVAL   THEORIES   IN 
MODERN   TIMES. 

IN  the  Apostolic  Age  the  Church  was  gov- 
erned by  Apostles.  In  the  Post-Apostolic 
Age  the  Church  was  governed  by  bishops. 
Hence  arises  a  question.  Did  the  Church 
begin  with  governing  itself  in  some  other 
manner,  as  the  first  Apostles  passed  away,  and  then 
gradually  develop  this  one  of  leaving  almost  all  gov- 
ernmental authority  in  the  hands  of  officers  called 
bishops,  and  finally  like  its  new  plan  so  well  as  to 
adopt  it  universally?  Or  did  the  first  Apostles, 
foreseeing  that  they  must  soon  pass  away,  devise 
this  scheme  of  government  and  leave  it  as  a  legacy 
of  wisdom  to  the  Church  ?  Or  again,  was  it  part  of 
the  original  plan  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ? 

Christian  scholars  are  much  divided  in  opinion 
about  this  matter.  We  will  first  look  at  the  two 
chief  theories  now  held  by  men  of  leadership,  and 
then  we  will  call  the  early  witnesses,  who  lived  while 
the  change  was  going  on,  and  see  what  they  say 
about  it.  For  the  sake  of  having  a  convenient  label 
by  which  to  refer  to  these  two  theories,  we  will  call 
them  "The  Third  Century  View"  and  "the  Post- 
Reformation  (non-Episcopal)  View." 

61 


62  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

I.  The  Third  Century  View.  In  the  middle  of 
the  third  century  the  general  opinion  of  the  Church 
about  its  own  history  was  that  when  our  Lord  con- 
stituted apostles  for  the  governing  of  His  Church, 
He  meant  that  office  to  last  till  the  end  of  time.  It 
was  supposed  that  when  He  said  to  the  Eleven,  "  Lo  ! 
I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world,"  that  was  a  precise  promise  of  the  continu- 
ance of  their  body  as  a  body  of  trustees  to  whom  a 
certain  ministry  was  committed,  until  His  coming 
again,  and  that  the  only  serious  changes  made  in  the 
Church's  ministry  in  passing  from  the  Apostolic  Age 
were  two, — (1)  the  change  in  method  of  work  from 
itinerant  governors,  exercising  authority  wherever 
they  might  feel  called  to  go,  to  local  governors,  ex- 
ercising authority  only  in  some  one  city  and  its  im- 
mediate neighborhood,  and  correspondingly  (2)  a 
change  of  title  from  apostle,  which  means  "  mes- 
senger," or  very  nearly,  "itinerant  minister,"  to 
bishop,  which  means  "overseer."  According  to  this 
view  there  were  a  great  many  apostles — it  had  come 
to  be  quite  a  common  office — before  the  close  of  the 
Apostolic  Age,  and  as  the  number  multiplied,  it 
came  to  be  thought  best  to  assign  particular  apostles 
to  particular  fields  of  work,  and  have  an  understand- 
ing that  while  all  governing  power  resided  in  the 
corporation  of  the  apostles  taken  together,  yet  for 
purposes  of  administration  each  apostle  would  be 
left  responsible  for  cultivating  some  small  portions 
of  the  vineyard  without  interference  from  others. 
Then  the  name  of  the  governing  officer  was  changed 
from  "  apostle  "  to  "  bishop,"  a  title  which  in  earlier 


Opinion  in  Third  Century.  63 

times  had  been  given  to  the  second  order  of  the 
ministry,  so  that  in  the  New  Testament  it  is  always 
equivalent  to  "presbyter,"  which  means  "elder."  A 
learned  bishop,  Theodoret  of  Cyrus,  writing  (about 
A.  D.  450)  a  commentary  on  1  Timothy  iii.  1,  puts 
it  in  this  way  :  "At  that  time  they  called  the  same 
persons  presbyters  and  bishops ;  but  those  who  are 
now  called  bishops  they  called  apostles.  But  as 
time  went  on,  the  name  of  the  apostleship  was  left 
for  those  who  were  truly  apostles,  but  they  gave  the 
name  of  bishop  to  those  who  were  formerly  called 
apostles."  Returning  now  to  the  third  century,  we 
may  embody  the  general  idea  of  that  age  about 
bishops  in  two  quotations  from  great  leaders  of  the 
Church.  We  draw  one  quotation  from  Asia  Minor 
and  one  from  North  Africa.  Firmilian,  Bishop  of 
Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  mentions  the  Apostles  and 
goes  on  to  speak  of  "  the  bishops  who  succeeded 
them  by  vicarious  ordination"  [Ante-Nicene  Chris- 
tian Library,  V.  394].  That  curious  phrase  "vica- 
rious ordination"  can  only  be  understood  as  mean- 
ing "  ordination  into  the  place  of  the  Apostles."  In 
like  manner  Cyprian,  the  martyr-bishop  of  Carthage, 
quotes  our  Lord's  words  to  St.  Peter :  "  Upon  this 
rock  I  will  build  My  Church,"  as  describing  "  the 
honor  of  a  bishop  [Cyprian  manifestly  assumes  that 
honor  given  to  apostles  in  the  New  Testament  be- 
longs equally  to  bishops  in  his  day]  and  the  order  of 
His  Church,"  and  goes  on  thus:  "Hence,  through 
the  changes  of  times  and  successions,  the  ordering  of 
bishops  and  the  plan  of  the  Church  flow  onwards,  so 
that  the  Church  is  founded  upon  the  bishops,  and 


64  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


every  act  of  the  Church  is  controlled  by  these  same 
rulers"  [Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library,  V.  305]. 

Of  course,  the  Church  about  A.  D.  250  might  be 
in  error  about  its  own  history  of  one  hundred  and 
fifty  years  before.  These  quotations  are  given  simply 
to  illustrate  what  the  Church  in  the  third  century 
actually  thought.  It  may,  however,  be  proper  to  in- 
troduce here  a  few  considerations,  often  overlooked, 
which  do  give  more  or  less  support  to  this  view  of 
the  continuity  of  the  apostolic  office  under  a  new 
name. 

1.  Contrary  to  the  commonly  received  opinion  of 
to-day,  our  Lord  seems  to  have  interested  Himself 
in  matters  of  organization.  How  do  we  know? 
Thus.  There  are  four  lists  of  the  Twelve  Apostles 
in  the  New  Testament,— St.  Matt.  x.  2-4 ;  St.  Mark 
iii.  16-19;  St.  Luke  vi.  14-16;  Acts  i.  13.  No  two 
lists  give  the  names  in  the  same  order,  though  the 
last  two  were  written  by  the  same  man,  and  yet,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  names  run  always  in  three  groups 
of  four,  and  no  name  ever  strays  out  of  its  own  par- 
ticular group.  Further,  the  first  name  in  each  group 
is  invariable.  This  can  hardly  be  a  matter  of  acci- 
dent. Evidently  the  first  Apostles  were  organized 
into  three  groups,  with  Simon  Peter  as  the  head  of 
the  first,  Philip  as  the  head  of  the  second,  and  James, 
the  son  of  Alphseus,  as  the  head  of  the  third.  The 
following  table  will  illustrate  these  statements.  Tak- 
ing St.  Matthew's  list  as  our  standard  of  comparison, 
and  following  the  Westcott  and  Hort  Text,  we  have 
the  numbers  running  thus  (the  invariable  heads  of 
groups  are  indicated  by  Roman  numerals) : 


A'postles  Numerous  in  New  Testament.  65 

St.  Matt.  I,  2,  3,  4;  V,  6,  7,  8 ;  IX,  10,  11,  12. 

St.  Mark  I,  3,  4,  2;  V,  6,  8,  7  ;  IX,  10,  11,  12. 

St.  Luke  I,  2,  3,  4 ;  V,  6,  8,  7 ;  IX,  11,  10,  12. 

Acts  I,  4,  3,  2;  -V,  7,  6,  8;  IX,  11,  10  [— ]. 
That  our  Lord  never  paid  any  attention  to  such  mat- 
ters should  hardly  be  maintained. 

2.  There  are  some  signs  that  apostles  became 
numerous  in  the  New  Testament  period.  Besides 
the  original  Twelve,  we  have  (13)  Matthias,  (14) 
Paul,  (15)  Barnabas,  (16)  James,  the  Lord's  brother,1 
(17)  Silas,2  not  to  include  Andronicus  and  Junias  [not 
Junia,  as  in  the  King  James  version  of  Rom.  xvi.  7], 
of  whom  the  cautious  and  impartial  Lightfoot  says, 
"  On  the  most  natural  interpretation "  they  "  are 
distinguished  members  of  the  apostulate,"  and  one 
or  two  others  that  might  be  named.  It  should  be 
added  that  the  Church  could  never  have  had  any 
serious  trouble  from  " false  apostles"  [2  Cor.  xi. 
13;  Rev.  ii.  2],  unless  the  number  of  persons  really 
holding  the  apostolic  office  had  become  indefinitely 
large.  Perhaps  Eusebius  may  have  been  wrong 
when  he  wrote  (Ecclesiastical  History  i.  12),  "there 
were  many  others  who  were  called  apostles,  in  imita- 


JCf.  Gal.  i.  19,  ii.  9  ;  Acts  xv.  13,  with  John  vii.  5  and  1  Cor. 
xv.  7.  It  will  appear  that  our  Lord's  "  brethren  "  did  cot  believe 
on  Him  six  months  before  His  death.  One  of  them,  James,  be- 
came afterwards  a  chief  apostle,  and  is  reckoned  by  Eusebius  and 
other  Church  historians  as  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem  in  the  sense 
of  local  presidency.  He  was  the  man  chiefly  known  to  St.  Paul 
as  "James,"  and  therefore  the  appearance  recorded  in  1  Cor.  xv. 
7,  was  probably  an  appearance  to  him,  finding  him  sceptical,  yet 
forcing  conviction  upon  him,  so  that  from  an  opponent  he  became 
a  believer. 

2Cf.  1  Thess.  i.  1  and  ii.  6,  "Paul  and  Silvauus"  .  .  .,  and 
again,  "we    .    .     .    Apostles." 

E 


66  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

tion  of  the  Twelve  "  ;  but  when  we  find  Clement  of 
Alexandria  (Stromata,  iv.  17),  speaking  of  his  name- 
sake of  Rome  as  "the  apostle,  Clement,"  it  does 
seem  like  a  bit  of  genuine  tradition  from  a  time,  a 
century  earlier,  when  for  a  time  the  same  man  might 
be  called  "apostle"  or  "bishop"  in  the  Church. 

3.  In  the  Revelation  (i.,  ii.,  iii.),  we  find  certain 
persons  called  by  the  title  of  "  angels  "  of  Churches. 
They  seem  to  be  Church  officers  having  an  apostolic 
fulness  of  authority,  for  they  are  held  responsible  by 
our  Lord  for  the  general  condition  of  the  Churches 
under  their  superintendence,  yet  no  such  title  is 
known  to  Church  History.  It  means  the  same  thing 
as  "  apostle,"  and  yet  it  is  not  "  apostle."  Accord- 
ing to  the  present  theory,  this  Revelation  was  sent 
from  God  just  as  the  Church  was  beginning  to  adapt 
the  apostolic  office  to  new  conditions  under  a  new 
name,  laying  aside  the  title  given  by  our  Lord  Him- 
self. At  such  a  time  our  Lord  speaks  from  heaven 
and  sends  messages  and  warnings  to  some  of  these 
localized  apostles,  now  ceasing  to  be  called  apostles. 
By  giving  them  directions  concerning  their  work  in 
the  new  method,  He  recognizes  and  sanctions  the 
new  method.  By  changing  His  own  name  for  their 
office  and  yet  using  a  word  of  similar  meaning,  He 
acknowledges  them  as  holding  the  same  office  which 
He  instituted,  and  yet  indicates  His  willingness  that 
His  own  title  for  it  should  be  disused. 

4.  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  Timothy  and 
Titus  seem  to  point  to  such  a  superintendence  of 
the  Churches  of  Ephesus  and  its  neighborhood  and 


Protestant  Feeling  about  Episcopacy .  67 

of  Crete,  respectively,  as  we  now  call  Episcopal,  by 
men  not  of  the  number  of  the  original  apostles. 

IT.  The  Post-Reformation  {non- Episcopal)  View. 
Views  are  very  apt  to  rise  out  of  feelings.  After 
the  Reformation  there  grew  up  many  bodies  of 
Christians  who  had  no  episcopate.  Some  thought- 
ful leaders  regretted  the  loss,1  but  they  felt  that  they 
were  called  of  God  to  organize  into  new  Churches 
large  groups  of  Christians  who  had  been  unright- 
eously excluded  from  Church  fellowship  by  the  or- 
ganizations already  existing.  If  neither  episcopal 
oversight  nor  episcopal  ordination  was  to  be  had, 
they  must  do  without  them.  Hence  they  read  their 
Church  History  with  a  prejudice.  The  papacy  was 
a  human  invention  which  had  passed  itself  off  as 
divine.  Why  not  the  episcopacy  also?  A  great 
many  things  had  been  supposed  to  be  proved  by 
"tradition,"  and  the  tradition  had  now  been  found 


'The  great  Lutheran  Confession  of  Augsburg  says  concerning 
bishops,  (pars  ii.,  art.  vii.),  "The  Churches  ought  necessarily,  and 
jure  divino,  to  obey  thern."  .  .  .  "  The  bishops  might  easily 
retain  the  obedience  that  is  due  them,  if  they  would  not  press 
men  to  observe  traditions  which  cannot  be  observed  with  a  good 
conscience."  So  the  Defense  of  the  Confession  said,  "We  here 
again  wish  to  testify  that  we  will  gladly  preserve  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal and  canonical  polity,  if  only  the  bishops  will  cease  to  behave 
cruelly  toward  our  Churches."  So  Melaucthon  said,  "I  see  what 
a  Church  we  shall  have,  if  we  overthrow  the  ecclesiastical  polity." 
So  John  Calvin  in  a  book  On  the  Necessity  of  Reforming  the  Church 
declares  that  "If  they  will  show  us  a  hierarchy  wherein  the 
bishops  are  so  above  others  that  they  refuse  not  to  be  under 
Christ,  there  is  no  anathema  that  they  will  not  be  worthy  of,  if 
there  shall  be  any  such,  who  will  not  observe  it  with  entire  obedi- 
ence." Whatever  the  faults  and  failures  of  the  actual  governors 
of  the  Church  at  that  period,  the  greatest  leaders  of  the  Conti- 
nental Reformation  still  thought  that  an  episcopal  government 
would  be  an  instrument  of  great  value  in  the  hands  of  a  reformed 
Church. 


68  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

to  be  as  worthless  as  any  old  wives'  gossip.  It  was 
easy  to  form  a  habit  of  assuming  that  any  testimony 
of  antiquity  that  one  did  not  like  was  one  of  these 
corrupt  traditions,  representing  only  a  careless,  or  an 
ignorant,  departure  from  the  principles  of  the  New 
Testament.  It  is  a  great  glory  of  modern  Prote's- 
tant  scholarship  that  it  has  for  some  years  been  pa- 
tiently investigating  the  Church's  records  and  revis- 
ing its  former  conclusions  on  a  more  truly  historical 
basis.  It  now  accepts  a  great  deal  of  historical  tes- 
timony which  it  used  to  set  aside.  Whereas  fifty 
years  ago  non -Episcopalian  scholars  of  eminence 
would  say,  "  There  is  no  proof  of  the  existence  of 
monarchical  episcopacy  before  the  beginning  of  the 
third  century,"  they  now  say,  "  Monarchical  episco- 
pacy did  not  get  a  foothold  at  Rome  till  about  A. 
D.  140,  having  probably  been  introduced  in  Asia 
Minor  some  years  earlier."  That  learned  Presby- 
terian scholar,  the  late  Doctor  SchafT,  held  it  proved 
that  a  number  of  Churches  in  Asia  Minor  had  dio- 
cesan bishops  A.  D.  115  or  earlier,  taking  this  as  the 
date  of  the  martyrdom  of  Ignatius  of  Antioch.  Then 
as  to  the  general  body  of  the  Church  he  says,  "  It  is 
matter  of  fact  that  the  episcopal  form  of  government 
was  universally  established  in  the  Eastern  and  West- 
ern Church  as  early  as  the  middle  of  the  second  cen- 
tury "  [Church  History,  ii.  144].  We  are  certainly 
drawing  nearer  to  an  agreement  about  our  facts.  It 
may  be  set  down  as  a  point  conceded  in  modern  schol- 
arship that  the  very  beginnings  of  diocesan  episco- 
pacy belong  to  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  cen- 
tury or  perhaps  to  the  last  years  of  the  first  century. 


Apostles  Chosen  as  Eye-witnesses.  69 

But  wherever  the  beginnings  of  Episcopal  govern- 
ment may  be  dated,  it  is  the  general  theory  of  non- 
Episcopalian  scholars  that  bishops  are  certainly  not 
apostles  under  another  name,  but  ministers  of  a 
totally  different  order  and  origin,  gradually  trans- 
formed from  mere  presiding  officers  in  a  council  of 
their  equals  into  real  governors  having  a  distinct  office 
of  their  own.  This  theory  points  to  the  words  used 
at  the  election  of  Matthias  (Acts  i.  21,  22),  as 
showing  that  the  very  idea  of  an  apostle  was  that 
of  one  who  had  been  a  companion  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
from  the  beginning  of  His  ministry,  and  who  could 
therefore  be  an  irresistible  witness  to  the  fact  of  His 
resurrection  from  the  grave.  St.  Paul  had  not  this 
qualification,  but  then  he  had  the  heavenly  vision 
which  caused  his  conversion,  and  that  is  held  to  be 
equivalent.  Of  course,  another  explanation  is  at 
least  possible.  St.  Peter  may  simply  have  meant 
that  while  there  were  many  Christian  believers, 
otherwise  well-gifted,  who  had  also  known  our  Lord 
closely  before  His  death,  and  had  personally  seen 
Him  after  His"  resurrection,  a  new  apostle  must  by 
all  means  be  selected  from  among  such,  and  may  also 
have  looked  forward  quite  clearly  to  a  conferring  of 
the  apostolic  office  upon  men  without  that  qualifi- 
cation twenty  and  thirty  and  forty  }^ears  later.  Bat 
many  careful  scholars  maintain  positively  that  it  is 
here  defined  in  Hoty  Scripture  as  part  of  the  es- 
sential qualification  of  an  apostle  that  he  be  thus  a 
personal,  independent  witness  of  the  fact  of  the  res- 
urrection of  our  Lord.  In  that  case,  it  is  plain,  the 
apostolic  office  could  not  have  lasted  long. 


70  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

Doctor  Schaff  suggests  for  supporting  consider- 
ations as  favoring  his  view  that  bishops  of  the  second 
century  are  not  apostles  renamed,  but  presbyters 
transformed : 

(1)  "  The  undeniable  identity  of  presbyters  and 
bishops  in  the  New  Testament."  This  is  so  far  from 
being  "  undeniable "  that  it  is  stoutly  denied  by 
some  of  the  latest  scholars  on  Doctor  Schaffs  side. 
On  the  other  side,  however,  it  is  always  maintained 
as  a  plain  fact  of  history.  It  does  not  seem  impos- 
sible that  if  a  certain  order  of  the  ministry  had  two 
titles,  one  of  them  might  be  borrowed  after  a  while 
to  mean  something  else.  For  instance  the  English 
"  Curate"  means  of  old  a  minister  in  responsible 
charge,  having  "  cure  "  of  souls.  It  means  now,  al- 
most invariably,  an  assistant-minister  not  in  responsi- 
ble charge.  To  change  the  meaning  of  a  word  is 
sometimes  easier  than  to  revolutionize  a  form  of  gov- 
ernment. The  question  is,  which  did  happen  about 
the  end  of  the  first  Christian  century. 

(2)  "  Later,  at  the  close  of  the  first,  and  even  in 
the  second  century,  the  two  terms  are  still  used  in 
like  manner  for  the  same  office." 

Non -Episcopalian  scholars  are  apt  to  speak  of  a 
"  confusion  "  in  the  use  of  these  words  lasting  to  the 
time  of  Ireneeus  (about  A.  D.  175),  who  frequently 
speaks  of  bishops  as  "elders."  Let  it  be  observed, 
however,  (a)  that  even  if  there  was  a  confusion,  that 
would  not  settle  the  question  how  the  confusion 
came  about,  (b)  that  there  is  no  example  of  calling  a 
presbyter  "  bishop  "  after  the  death  of  St.  John,  un- 
less it  be  that  the  Teachiny  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  and 


Grounds  for  the  Non- Episcopalian  View.        71 

Hennas  are  to  be  dated  in  the  second  century  [and 
the  cases  in  Hernias  may  be  cases  of  reference  to  the 
later  kind  of  bishop  after  all],  and  (c)  that  in  call- 
ing diocesan  bishops  "  elders  "  there  was  never  any 
confusion  at  all.  "  Elder  "  has  always  been  used  freely 
in  Greek,  Latin,  and  English,  for  older  men  and  men 
of  an  older  day.  And  even  in  the  more  technical 
sense  the  highest  ecclesiasticism  holds  a  bishop  to  be 
an  "  elder "  too,  even  as  St.  Peter  was,  when  he 
wrote,  "  The  elders  which  are  among  you  I  exhort, 
who  am  also  an  elder"  (1  Peter  v.  1).  Surely 
there  was  no  confusion  in  his  mind  between  the  dis- 
tinct offices  of  the  presbyter  and  the  Apostle. 

(3)  "  The  express  testimony  of  the  learned 
Jerome  that  the  Churches  originally,  before  divi- 
sions arose  through  the  instigation  of  Satan,  were 
governed  by  the  common  council  of  the  presbyters, 
and  not  till  a  later  period  was  one  of  the  presbyters 
placed  at  the  head,  to  watch  over  the  Church  and 
suppress  schisms.  He  traces  the  difference  of  the 
office  simply  to  'ecclesiastical 'custom,  as  distinct  from 
divine  institution."  Jerome  was  a  learned  man,  but 
not  an  impartial  one.  His  views  were  very  much 
colored  by  his  feelings,  and  at  one  time  in  his  life  it 
was  a  joy  to  him  to  make  light  of  bishops.  But  did 
he  know?  Certain  it  is  that  he  was  born  about  two 
hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  critical  time  that 
we  are  thinking  about,  and  that  Eusebius,  a  hundred 
years  nearer  the  events,  and  quite  as  learned  and 
scholarly  in  historical  lines,  was  just  as  confident  on 
the  other  side.  We  can  hardly  accept  either  of  them 
as  a  final  authority. 


72  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

(4)  "  The  custom  of  the  Church  of  Alexandria, 
where  from  the  Evangelist  Mark  down  to  the  middle 
of  the  third  century,  the  twelve  presbyters  elected 
one  of  their  number  president  and  called  him 
bishop."  This  is  a  story  told  in  one  of  Jerome's 
letters,  and  also  by  Eutychius,  a  patriarch  of  Alex- 
andria, writing  a  history  in  the  tenth  century.  If 
this  custom  really  violated  what  most  people  consid- 
ered to  be  Church  principles  in  the  third  century, 
why  do  we  hear  of  no  quarrel  about  it  ?  Probably 
it  did  not.  Eutychius  says  that  in  that  same  period 
there  was  no  bishop  in  all  Egypt  outside  of  Alex- 
andria. Now  the  Church  was  strong  in  Egypt. 
Probably,  the  present  writer  has  thought,  those 
"  twelve  elders  "  were  men  who  had  been  ordained 
to  that  office  in  the  Church  which  ma}^  be  called 
Apostolic  or  Episcopal, — twelve  k'  elders "  of  the 
lower  rank  could  not  have  sufficed  for  the  great 
city  of  Alexandria  in  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  when  Rome  had  forty  -  six !  —  and  who 
governed  the  Egyptian  Churches  from  Alexan- 
dria in  reverent  imitation  of  an  earlier  twelve 
governing  from  Jerusalem.  When  their  presiding 
officer  died,  they  would  elect  another  from  among 
themselves  and  call  him  preeminently  the  bishop  of 
Alexandria.  This  explanation  supposes  that  Jerome 
had  somewhat  misunderstood,  or  misused,  the  story 
of  a  state  of  things  which  had  come  to  an  end  a 
hundred  years  before  his  birth.  Yv7hether  we  are 
right  or  wrong,  Jerome  himself  goes  right  on  from 
this  story  to  the  following  words, — "  For  what  func- 
tion belongs  to  a  bishop  that  does  not  also  belong  to 


New  Forms  of  Non- Episcopalian  View.         73 

a  presbyter,  excepting  ordination  ?  "  (Jerome,  Let- 
ter cxlvi.,  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  vi. 
289.)  "Excepting  ordination"  The  story  presents  a 
real  difficulty,  but  it  is  hardly  to  be  taken  as  show- 
ing that  the  writer  thought  that  presbyters  could 
ordain.  Nay,  in  this  very  letter  he  finds  it  conven- 
ient to  claim  in  one  place  that  all  bishops  are  "  suc- 
cessors of  the  apostles." 

Twenty  years  ago,  the  writer  would  have  ended 
this  chapter  here  and  proceeded  at  once  to  call  in 
the  early  witnesses.  To-day  there  is  more  to  be  said 
about  rival  theories  first.  Deepening  study  has  driven 
back  the  battle-line  of  controversy.  A  new  scholar- 
ship has  sprung  up  on  the  non-Episcopalian  side, 
which  is  frankly  dissatisfied  with  statements  even  so 
late  as  Doctor  Schaffs.  It  recognizes  in  the  letters 
of  Ignatius  a  prevailing  episcopacy  in  Asia  Minor  in 
the  earl}^  years  of  the  second  century.  It  sees  that 
the  explanation  of  such  an  appearance  must  be 
looked  for  in  the  conditions  of  the  first  century.  It 
has  subjected  those  conditions  to  a  new  and  search- 
ing examination  of  microscopic  fineness.  The  fun- 
damental question  between  the  two  theories,  to  state 
it  once  more,  is  this  :  Are  second  century  bishops 
apostles  under  a  new  name  ?  or  are  they  some  other 
order  of  ministers  promoted  to  a  new  office?  Many 
eminent  Episcopalian  scholars  have  taken  the  latter, 
here  called  for  convenience  the  "non-Episcopalian," 
view,  and  one  of  the  most  distinguished  of  them  all, 
the  late  Bishop  Lightfoot,  held  it  in  this  form, — the 
episcopate  a  development  out  of  the  presbyterate, 
with  reservation   of  the   title  "  bishop,"    or   "  over- 


74  The  Post- Apostolic  Age, 

seer,"  to  those  presbyters  who  came  to  be  permanent 
presiding  officers,  with  greatly  enlarged  powers,  and 
all  this  an  evolution,  rather  than  a  revolution,  under 
the  eye  and  guiding  hand  of  St.  John,  the  last  sur- 
vivor of  the  Twelve.  It  was  the  teaching  of  Bishop 
Lightfoot  that  just  because  the  institution  of  episco- 
pal government  of  the  Church  was  thus  a  natural, 
providential  growth,  to  which  the  Church's  mind 
was  led  by  the  guiding  of  the  Spirit,  therefore  it  was 
in  a  particularly  high  sense  of  divine  origin,  not  in- 
herently necessary  to  the  Church's  being,  or  well- 
being,  but  also  not  to  be  given  up  or  set  aside  with- 
out very  plain  providential  intimations  that  its  use- 
fulness had  passed  away."  He  was  also  so  far  from 
seeing  any  such  intimations,  that  in  the  last  years  of 
his  life  he  spoke  of  "  the  form  of  Church  government 
inherited  from  apostolic  times  "  as  one  of  the  "  essen- 
tials which  could  under  no  circumstances  be  aban- 
doned "  by  the  Church  of  England  in  efforts  for 
Home  Reunion  {Commentary  on  Philippiansy  Preface 
xiv.). 

Another  line  taken  by  an  Episcopalian  scholar  de- 
serves notice  on  the  "  non-Episcopalian  "  side, — that 
of  the  late  Doctor  Edwin  Hatch  in  the  Bampto.n 
Lectures  of  1880,  The  Organization  of  the  Early 
Christian  Churches.  This  volume  has  the  high  dis- 
tinction of  having  been  introduced  to  German  read- 
ers with  warm  commendation  by  Professor  Harnack, 
perhaps  the  most  widely  learned  scholar  now  living 
in  the  department  of  early  Church  history.  A  very 
great  scholar,  it  may  be  said,  is  not  always  even  a 


Theory  of  Dr.  Hatch.  75 

moderately  good  reasoner.  Some  readers  of  Doctor 
Hatch's  book  will  admire  ungrudgingly  his  labo- 
rious learning,  and  close  the  volume  with  a  sigh  over 
his  defective  sense  of  what  constitutes  proof.  But 
whether  his  proofs  are  held  to  stand  good,  or  no, 
some  points  which  he  makes  should  be  familiar  to  a 
student  of  to-day. 

(1)  He  still  holds  the  old  view  of  the  identity 
of  "  presbyters  "  and  "  bishops  "  in  the  first  century, 
but  he  explains  that  they  got  the  name  of  "presby- 
ters "  ("  elders  ")  because  they  were  really  a  council 
of  the  elder  men  in  each  Christian  community.  One 
gathers  that  he  would  hold  that  a  young  man  like 
Timothy  (1  Tim.  iv.  12)  could  not  have  been  a  mem- 
ber of  such  a  council  in  early  days.  There  must 
have  been  natural  leadership  in  other  ways,  but  age 
was  one  essential  condition.  This  council  of  older 
men  was  something  that  existed  already  in  all  Jewish 
communities  under  the  same  name.  What  more  nat- 
ural than  for  Jewish  Christians  to  borrow  it  without 
change?  The  title  " bishop,"  on  the  other  hand, 
comes  from  Greek  sources.  Greek  clubs  and  so- 
cieties were  apt  to  have  an  episcopos — so  we  may  rep- 
resent in  English  characters  the  word  which  we 
have  adopted  into  English  speech  as  "bishop,"  and 
which  means  "  overseer," — and  in  such  organiza- 
tions the  matters  looked  after  by  the  episcopos  were 
money  matters.  Obviously,  argues  Dr.  Hatch,  the 
Christian  Churches  called  their  "  elders "  "  over- 
seers "  from  the  same  kind  of  oversight,  because 
they  received  the  alms  of  the  Christian  community, 


76  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


and  decided  how  they  should  be  used.1  Later,  he 
would  suggest,  one  "  elder  "  came  to  have  all  this 
"overseeing"  left  in  his  hands.  Then  he  soon  came 
to  have  an  exclusive  hold  on  the  title  which  belonged 
to  that  work.  This  theory  provides  a  perfectly  pos- 
sible and  simple  explanation  for  the  transference  of 
the  title  "  bishop  "  from  many  to  one.  No  early 
writer  says  that  things  did  happen  in  this  way. 
Indeed,  they  tell  us  that  things  happened  in  another 
way.  Dr.  Hatch  claims  that  their  statements  are 
not  to  be  believed,  that  their  explanation  is  obviously 
artificial,  invented  to  cover  a  departure  from  the 
earlier  ways,  and  that  his  explanation  makes  all  the 
known  facts  fall  easily  into  place. 

(2)  It  is  a  very  important  part  of  Dr.  Hatch's 
theory  that  these  Christian  ministries  of  presbyters, 
or  bishops,  and  deacons,  were  at  first  purely  a  busi- 
ness matter.  Elders  or  bishops  did  not  necessarily 
teach  or  preach,  baptize,  celebrate  the  Eucharist,  or 
do  any  spiritual  duties  whatever.  Those  things  were 
for  "  prophets  "  and  "  teachers  "  to  attend  to.     These 


'This  is  quite  possible,  hut  all  arguments  as  to  what  people 
ought  to  have  raeaut  in  adopting  words  to  express  new  ideas  are 
highly  precarious.  Thus  if  some  Chinese  student  of  forgotten 
English,  centuries  hence,  shall  argue  that  because  "steamboat" 
meant  "boat  urged  forward  by  steam,"  therefore  we  must  have 
meant  by  "sawhorse"  "horse  urged  forward  by  a  saw,"  he 
will  be  doing  no  worse  than  philological  scholars  have  been  known 
to  do  before,  but  he  will  be  profoundly  mistaken.  Men  have  a 
meaning.  They  look  about  for  a  word  to  express  it.  If  they  find 
one  that  suits  them,  they  seize  upon  it.  The}'  do  not  stop  to 
think  whether  that  word  might  more  logically  have  been  used  for 
something  else  which  they  did  not  happen  to  want  to  say.  Dr. 
Hatch  assumes  constantly  that  Christians  really  had  nothing  to 
say  about  their  ordained  ministry  which  a  Jew  might  not  have 
said  of  his  village-elders,  or  a  Greek  of  the  steward  of  his  club. 


Theory  of  M.  Reville.  77 

presbyter-bishops  were  simply  keepers  of  accounts, 
managers  of  business  matters,  such  as  the  distribu- 
tion of  poor-relief,  and  then  because  this  last  duty 
included  a  responsibility  for  deciding  who  were 
worthy  applicants,  judges  in  all  cases  of  Church 
discipline.  They  were  rulers,  not  pastors.  Any 
gifted  Christian  might  be  a  prophet,  a  teacher,  a 
leader  in  spiritual  things,  without  any  ordination  at 
all.  Ordination  set  a  man  apart  for  serving  tables 
and  ruling  and  for  nothing  else.  This  view  is  sup- 
ported by  Dr.  Hatch,  (p.  78),  by  a  reference  to  1 
Tim.  v.  17,  "Let  the  elders  that  rule  well  be 
counted  worthy  of  double  honor,  especially  they  who 
labor  in  the  wrord  and  doctrine."  "It  is  a  clear  in- 
ference," he  says,  that  "if  they  taught  as  well  as 
ruled,  they  combined  two  offices."  Perhaps  one 
should  observe,  however,  that  it  is  ruling,  and  doing 
it  well,  that  brings  double  honor,  not  ruling  and  do- 
ing something  else,  and  again,  that  ruling  well  seems 
to  be  defined  as  especially  good,  if  it  includes  teach- 
ing, as  if  the  writer  conceived  teaching  as  part  of 
the  ruling.  And  that  is  just  what  this  writer  did 
hold.  He  says  (1  Tim.  iii.  2),  "a  bishop  must  be 
.  .  .  apt  to  teach,"  a  man  of  the  teacher's 
gift  and  habit.  Why  should  an  episcopos  such  as 
Dr.  Hatch  supposes  be  required  to  possess  an  en- 
dowment of  this  kind  ?  Did  a  Greek  social  club 
require  anything  of  the  sort  of  its  episcopos  f 

As  an  example  of  Continental  thought  about  the 
Christian  beginnings,  we  may  refer  to  a  work  of  M. 
Re*ville,  a  professor  in  the  Sorbonne,  Les  Origines  de 
V  Ejnscopat.     It  represents  the  latest  word  of  French 


78  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Protestantism.  No  scholar,  says  M.  Reville,  pays 
any  attention  now  to  alleged  utterances  of  Jesus 
Christ  after  His  resurrection.  To  attach  any  belief 
to  such  passages  as  St.  Matt,  xxviii.  18-20,  or  St. 
John  xx.  20-23,  would  be  totally  unhistorical.  He 
holds  with  Dr.  Hatcli  that  all  ordained  ministers  in 
the  early  Church  had  a  purely  secular  ministry,  and 
that  all  really  spiritual  ministries  were  performed  by 
volunteers  who  felt  moved  thereto, — of  course,  pres- 
byters and  such  like  might  have  such  movings  as  well 
as  others, — but  that  gradually  the  non-spiritual 
ministry  of  table-serving  and  financiering  assumed 
to  itself  all  spiritual  functions,  as  spiritual  power  de- 
clined. The  very  first  Christian  Churches,  he  tells 
us,  were  thoroughgoing  democracies.  At  Corinth, 
for  example,  St.  Paul  had,  and  claimed,  no  authority 
whatever.  He  had  no  power  to  carry  out  any  policy 
there  except  as  he  might  be  able  by  persuasive  argu- 
ment to  induce  a  majority  in  the  Church  to  adopt 
his  views.  "  Inspiration  "  and  "  prophecy  "  were  the 
great  forces  of  those  early  days,  and  prevailed 
mightily  over  such  considerations  as  "tradition" 
and  "custom  "  and  "ecclesiastical  law."  This  does 
not  seem  just  like  St.  Paul's  idea,  who  wrote,  "  I 
will  know,  not  the  speech  of  them  which  are  puffed 
up,  but  the  power.  .  .  .  Shall  I  come  to  you 
with  a.  rod  ?  "  Or  again,  "  The  rest  will  I  set  in 
order,  when  I  come  " ;  "  We  have  no  such  custom, 
neither  the  Churches  of  God  "  ;  "  If  I  come  again,  I 
will  not  spare  "  ;  "I  write  these  things  being  absent, 
lest  being  present  I  should  use  sharpness."  Doubt- 
less there  was  a  highly  democratic  party  in  Corinth, 


Presbyters  not  Bishojis  at  all.  79 

but  it  would  seem  as  if  St.  Paul  insisted  that  he  had 
just  that  authority  which  they  denied. l 

But  the  most  notable  points  in  M.  ReVille's  view 
are  two.  (1)  He  finds  a  difference  between  the 
presbyter  and  the  bishop.  The  Churches  of  Palestine 
organized  in  true  Jewish  fashion  with  a  council  of 
elders,  he  thinks.  Churches  mostly  of  Gentile 
origin  organized  in  another  way.  Both  kinds  of 
Church  had  subordinate  officers  and  called  them  by 
the  same  name,  "  deacons."  But  bishops  and  pres- 
byters were  somewhat  different  officers  of  different 
groups  of  Churches.  The  fact  that  St.  Paul  wrote 
to  the  Church  of  Philippi  as  under  the  care  of 
"  bishops  and  deacons,"  and  that  St.  Polycarp  writ- 
ing to  the  same  Church  fifty  or  sixty  years  later, 
mentions  only  "  presbyters  and  deacons,"  gives  him 
no  difficulty.  He  supposes  a  serious  change  in 
Church  government  to  have  taken  place  at  Philippi 
in  the  interval, — a  change  too  from  a  Gentile  to  a 
Jewish  predominance!  (2)  Having  to  deal  with 
the    speech  of  St.   Paul  to  the  Ephesian  presbyters 


1  As  a  further  illustration  of  the  difference  between  great  learn- 
ing and  a  keen  sense  of  what  constitutes  proof,  one  may  take  this 
precious  piece  of  argument, — "  Neither  at  Tyre,  nor  at  Ptolemais, 
is  there  the  least  trace  of  any  ecclesiastical  organization  what- 
ever." Precisely  so.  All  that  we  hear  of  Tyre  as  a  Christian 
centre  is  contained  in  three  verses  (4-6)  of  Acts  xxi.,  and  all  that 
we  learn  of  Ptolemais  in  that  character  is  contained  in  one  verse 
more  (7)  of  that  same  chapter.  There  is  equally  no  trace  that 
the  disciples  in  those  places  ever  had  anything  to  eat.  There  is 
also  no  trace  that  they  wore  clothing  when  they  went  abroad. 
Indeed,  the  fact  that  they  found  no  difficulty  in  all  kneeling 
down  on  the  shore,  when  they  prayed,  might  be  taken  to  suggest 
that  they  did  not  wear  clothes.  Surely  the  argument  of  this 
eminent  scholar  can  only  be  described  in  his  own  beautiful  and 
expressive  tongue.     C'est  ires  naif! 


80  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

(Acts  xx.  17,  28),  where  he  speaks  of  "the  flock 
over  the  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you  over- 
seers" in  Greek,  "  bishops,"  he  sets  it  down  as  a  late 
forgery  contrived  on  purpose  to  give  an  appearance 
of  high  sanction  to  what  was  really  an  innovation 
on  the  ecclesiastical  order,  when  "  bishops "  and 
presbyters  had  come  to  be  identified  in  the  popular 
mind  (and  had  not  yet  been  pulled  apart  again  by 
the  setting  up  of  a  diocesan  bishop),  and  were  sup- 
posed really  to  have  been  endued  with  mysterious 
powers  by  the  Holy  Ghost  at  their  ordination. 
Correspondingly,  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus 
are  set  down  as  forgeries  of  the  same  period  and 
purpose.  This  tendency  to  set  aside  portions  of  the 
New  Testament  volume  as  unauthoritative  is  a  very 
distinguishing  sign  of  the  times.  Of  course,  it  has 
been  done  by  many  critics  for  many  generations.  It 
was  done  by  heretics  in  the  second  century.  But  it 
is  now  the  easy  resort  of  Christian  scholars  who 
consider  themselves  very  orthodox.  Meanwhile 
those  of  us  who  hold  the  old-fashioned  view  of  the 
origins  of  the  ministry  feel  justified  in  asking  the 
attention  of  our  brethren  on  the  other  side  to  this 
fact, — "  Your  best  modern  scholars  are  insisting  that 
St.  Paul  cannot  have  written  the  letters  to  Timothy 
and  Titus  which  the  Church  accepted  as  Sacred 
Scriptures,  because  they  find  them  to  mean  what  we 
have  always  said  that  they  meant."  We  cannot 
here  go  into  the  question  whether  a  forger  did  impose, 
or  whether  a  forger  could  have  imposed,  upon  the 
Church  about  A.  D.  90-100  letters  purporting  to  be 
of  St.  Paul,  but  gravely  misrepresenting  him,  and  in- 


Dr.  McGifferfs  View.  81 

tended  to  bolster  up  a  s)rstem  which  had  all  grown 
up  in  the  years,  not  more  than  thirty -seven  at  the 
outside,  since  St.  Paul  suffered  martyrdom. 

A  notable  presentation  of  the  non-Episcopalian 
theory  in  its  later  manner  is  that  of  Dr.  A.  C.  Mc- 
Giffert,  a  Presbyterian  scholar  of  distinction,  Pro- 
fessor of  Church  History  in  the  Union  Theological 
Seminary,  New  York,  a  pupil  of  Harnack,  but  a  thor- 
oughly independent  enquirer,  in  his  book,  The  Apos- 
tolic Age,  published  in  1897.  Like  most  of  the  later 
writers  on  his  side  of  the  question  he  dwells  much 
on  the  importance  of  the  "prophets,"  with  their 
special  gifts,  in  the  early  years  of  the  Church,  and  he 
regards  "bishop  "  as  the  title  of  an  office  of  financial 
rather  than  spiritual  interest.  But  he  gives  his 
view  much  greater  historical  probability  by  suggest- 
ing that  it  was  just  exactly  the  men  of  most  marked 
spiritual  endowments,  "apostles,"  "prophets," 
"  teachers,"  to  whom  the  office  of  distributing  the 
Church  funds  and  the  consequent  administration  of 
the  Church's  discipline  were  ordinarily  committed. 
That  helps  to  account,  as  other  forms  of  this  theory 
had  failed  to  account,  for  the  obvious  fact  that  our 
earliest  Christian  writings  treated  these  officers  as  if 
they  ivere  especially  concerned  with  spiritual  things. 
The  episcopoi  were  men  who  had  spiritual  oversight, 
Dr.  McGiffert  would  say,  but  they  had  not  these 
spiritual  cares  because  they  were  Church  officers 
under  this  title.  They  were  put  in  trust  with  this 
semi-secular  office  because  they  had  already  risen  to 
leadership  in  more  purely  spiritual  things.  What 
happened,  he  goes  on  to  enquire,  when  the  supply 
F 


82  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

of  supernaturally  gifted  "  prophets  "  and  "  teachers  " 
began  to  fail  ?  and  his  answer  is,  The  Church  looked 
around  for  suitable  men  to  be  episcopoi  and  found 
them  among  her  elder  membership  rather  than  in 
the  younger  set.  We  all  agree  that  "  elders  "  and 
"  younger  men  "  are  sometimes  used  both  in  the  New 
Testament  and  in  other  early  Christian  writings 
in  an  entirely  untechnical  way.  "  Likewise,  ye 
younger,  submit  yourselves  unto  the  elder  "  (1  Peter 
v.  5),  certainly  does  not  mean,  "Ye  deacons  be  sub- 
ject to  the  presbyters."  So,  Dr.  McGiffert  would 
say,  "  elders  "  continued  for  long  to  be  no  technical 
term  at  all,  but  simply  meant  the  mature,  experi- 
enced men,  the  natural  leaders  of  the  Christian  com- 
munity. From  among  such  alone  would  "  bishops  " 
be  chosen  as  soon  as  extraordinary  spiritual  gifts 
began  to  fail.  Thus  neither  those  who  identify 
"  bishops "  and  "  presbyters,"  nor  those  who  think 
that  the  two  are  distinct  groups  of  officers,  are  right. 
Rather,  there  is  no  office  of  presbyters  at  all,  but 
some  presbyters,  that  is  "  elder  Christians,"  were  put 
into  a  special  office  as  "  bishops,"  and  others  were 
not.  Acts  xiv.  23  and  Titus  i.  5  are  not  to  be  under- 
stood of  ordaining  men  to  be  elders,  but  of  appoint- 
ing certain  elder  men  to  an  office  not  named,  in  fact 
the  office  of  an  episcopos.  To  the  present  writer  this 
seems  the  most  defensible  form  of  the  non-Episco- 
palian view  that  he  has  ever  seen  presented.  It  does 
not,  however,  seem  to  account  fully  satisfactorily  for 
the  emergence  of  a  clerical  order  of  presbyters,  who 
may  be  young  men,  appearing  in  a  graduated  hier- 
archy, between  a  highly  authoritative  bishop  and  his 


Acts  and  Pastoral  Epistles  Forgeries.  83 

deacons,  in  the  first  years  of  the  second  century.  It 
may  be  noted  that  Dr.  McGiffert  is  one  of  those 
scholars  who  reconstruct  the  New  Testament  with  a 
strong  hand,  when  it  does  not  suit  them.  The  Book 
of  the  Acts  is  here  set  down  as  a  composition  of  one 
who  had  never  known  St.  Paul,  and  had  in  some 
points  totally  misunderstood  him,  in  the  last  years 
of  the  first  century.  "  The  ascription  to  him  [St. 
Paul]  and  to  other  apostles  of  the  power  to  impart 
the  Spirit  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  which  we  find 
in  the  Book  of  Acts,  is  certainly  not  in  accord  with 
his  conception  "  (p.  542).  "  We  should  hardly  ex- 
pect one  to  be  so  unfamiliar  with  his  [St.  Paul's] 
Gospel,  as  the  author  of  the  Acts  seems  to  have 
been  "  (p.  238  n.).  In  like  manner  the  Epistles  to 
Timothy  and  Titus  are  set  down  as  not  only  not  St. 
Paul's,  but  very  poor  compositions  indeed.  "It  is 
not  simply  the  absence  of  the  great  fundamental 
conceptions  of  the  Pauline  Gospel,  it  is  the  presence 
of  another  Gospel  of  a  different  aspect,  that  is  most 
significant  M  (p.  403).  They  were  a  deliberate  forgery 
founded  on  letters  actually  written  by  the  Apostle. 
"  Paul's  brief  letters  to  Timothy  and  Titus  coming 
into  his  hands,  he  added  to  them  in  good  faith  what 
he  believed  Paul  himself  would  say  in  the  light 
of  the  peculiar  needs  of  the  day "  (p.  412). 
What  was  that  day,  according  to  these  lights?  "The 
emphasis  upon  heresy  in  all  three  epistles,  the  lack 
of  the  primitive  idea  of  the  endowment  of  all  believ- 
ers with  spiritual  gifts,  fitting  them  for  special  forms 
of  service,  and  the  substitution  for  such  inspired  be- 
lievers of  appointed  officers,   charged  with  the  per- 


84  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

formance  of  teaching  as  well  as  of  financial  and  dis- 
ciplinary functions,  points  to  a  time  as  late  as  the 
close  of  the  first  century  or  the  early  years  of  the 
second  "  (pp.  413-414). 

This,  then,  is  the  latest  hinge  of  the  controversy, 
the  question  whether  certain  books  received  for  ages 
as  Holy  Scripture,  are  truly  unworthy  of  the  name. 
It  is  a  question  for  scholars.  It  will  be  discussed  for 
a  generation  or  two,  probably,  before  they  will  agree. 
It  cannot  be  discussed  here.  Only  it  does  seem  fair 
to  say  that  one  of  the  grounds  which  this  newest 
scholarship  is  alleging  for  casting  certain  books  out 
of  the  New  Testament  Canon,  is  that  they  do  not 
speak  as  it  would  judge  that  they  ought  to  speak,  on 
the  subject  of  the  origins  of  the  Christian  ministry. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  HISTORIC   EPISCOPATE:      THE   WITNESSES 
CALLED. 

E  have  seen  that  there  is  much  in  which 
scholars  cannot  yet  agree.  What,  for  in- 
stance, was  the  form  of  government  of 
the  Church  of  Corinth  in  St.  Paul's 
day  ?  Was  it  a  pure  democracy,  wherein 
the  members  of  the  Church  managed  their  own 
affairs,  deciding  all  questions  by  a  majority  vote? 
Or  was  it  a  sort  of  constitutional  monarchy,  limited 
partly  by  some  well-recognized  rights  of  Christians 
generally,  under  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  hath 
made  us  free,  and  partly  by  the  consideration  and 
largeness  and  common  sense  of  St.  Paul,  the 
governing  apostle?  Different  men  read  the  New 
Testament  indications  and  come  to  the  most  opposite 
results.  It  is  agreed,  however,  on  all  sides,  that  in 
the  end  of  the  first  century  and  the  beginning  of  the 
second  a  government  by  one  official  head  called  a 
bishop  was  appearing  in  the  Churches,  that  there 
was  something  new  about  it,  and  that  by  the  middle 
of  the  second  century  the  new  use  was  pretty 
general.  We  are  now  to  call  in  some  early  witnesses 
and  see  if  they  can  answer  certain  questions  for  us. 
We  want  to  know  whether  government  by  single 
officers  (under  whatever  name)  was  established  by 
apostles  in  any  of  the  great  Church  centres,  whether 

85 


86  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  apostles'  office  was  understood  to  have  con- 
tinued beyond  the  Twelve  and  St.  Paul,  and 
whether  government  by  chief  officers  such  as  we  now 
call  "  bishops "  was  regarded  by  men  who  were  in 
the  midst  of  the  change  of  methods  (whatever  that 
change  may  have  been)  as  part  of  a  divine  plan. 

1.  First  we  will  call  Eusebius,  the  historian.  He 
lived  two  centuries  after  the  time  about  which  we 
are  enquiring  but  then  he  had  access  to  many  valua- 
ble records  now  lost,  and  among  them  to  the  Church 
History  of  Hegesippus,  written  as  early  as  A.  D.  165. 
According  to  Eusebius,  then,  the  Church  of  Jeru- 
salem had  James  the  Lord's  brother,  called  in  Holy 
Scripture  an  apostle,  for  its  first  bishop.  He  quotes 
Hegesippus  as  sa}dng  that  "  James,  the  brother  of 
the  Lord,  succeeded  to  the  government  of  the  Church 
in  conjunction  with  the  Apostles,"  and  Clement  of 
Alexandria  as  sajdng  that  "  Peter  and  James  and 
John  .  .  .  strove  not  after  honor,  but  chose 
James  the  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem."  After  James 
are  named  fourteen  other  bishops  of  Jerusalem  be- 
fore the  destruction  under  Hadrian,  A.  D.  132,  the 
list  beginning  with  Symeon,  son  of  Clopas,  which 
Clopas  was,  according  to  Hegesippus,  a  brother  of 
St.  Joseph,  making  Symeon  a  (legal)  cousin  of 
our  Lord.  Eusebius  illustrates  his  own  careful 
accuracy  by  telling  us  that  he  could  find  no  table  of 
these  first  bishops  of  Jerusalem  with  their  dates,  but 
that  it  was  understood  that  they  were  all  short-lived. 

For  the  Church  of  Alexandria  he  gives  a  list  of 
bishops  with  definite  dates,  St.  Mark  the  Evange- 
list coming  first,  Annianus  following  him  A.  D.  62, 


Eusehian  Lists  of  Early  Bishops.  87 

and  governing  the  Church  for  twenty-two  years, 
Abilius  succeeding  A.  D.  84,  Cerdon  A.  D.  97,  and 
so  on. l 

For  the  Church  of  Antioch  Eusebius  does  not 
profess  to  know  the  dates  of  things  for  the  first  be- 
ginnings, but  he  is  clear  that  Ignatius  was  the  second 
bishop,  Evodius  having  preceded  him.  Even  severe 
critics  acknowledge  that  this  must  be  a  historical 
statement.  A  mere  legend  would  have  connected 
so  interesting  a  person  as  Ignatius  straight  back  to 
St.  John  or  St.  Peter  or  St.  Paul. 

Coming  now  to  the  Church  of  the  imperial  city, 
Rome,  Eusebius  had  a  list  of  the  early  bishops,  made 
by  Irenseus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  who  visited  Rome  in 
the  year  177,  and  who  gives  this  testimony :  "  The 
blessed  Apostles,  having  founded  and  established  the 
Church,  entrusted  the  office  of  the  episcopate  to 
Linus."  Then  come  Anencletus,  Clement,  the  writer 
of  the  letter  to  the  Church  of  Corinth,  Evarestus, 
Alexander,    Sixtus,    Telesphorus,    Hyginus,     Pius, 


1  Some  scholars  pour  contempt  ou  these  dates,  and  so  on  the 
whole  list.  As  an  example  of  their  reasoning  take  this.  If  St. 
Mark's  successor  was  made  bishop  in  the  year  62,  St.  Mark 
must  have  died  in  that  year  or  earlier,  but  according  to  the  best 
traditions  St.  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel  after  St.  Peter's  death, 
and  so  as  late  as  A.  D.  65  at  least.  But  to  suppose  that  St. 
Mark  must  have  died  before  he  could  have  had  a  successor  as 
apostle  or  bishop  in  charge  of  the  Alexandrian  Church,  and  that 
he  could  by  no  possibility  have  left  a  substitute  at  Alexandria,  as 
St.  Paul  once  left  St.  Timothy  at  Ephesus,  and  go  somewhere 
else  to  do  a  special  work  which  especially  called  him,  is  a  very 
uncareful  assumption.  It  is  not  scholarly  to  throw  Eusebius 
overboard  whenever  one  does  not  like  his  statements,  and  one 
may  predict  that  after  Lightfoot's  examination  of  the  Eusebian 
chronology  of  bishops  of  Rome  and  bishops  of  Antioch  has  had 
time  to  be  digested  by  scholars  generally,  the  old-time  historian 
will  be  treated  with  more  respect. 


88  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Anicetus,  Soter,  Eleutherus.  Nothing  could  be 
clearer  or  more  positive.  On  the  other  hand,  some 
really  eminent  modern  scholars  set  this  testimony  all 
aside.  They  do  not  question  that  Irenseus  found 
such  a  list  of  bishops  at  Rome ;  but  they  argue 
(rather  uncertainly)  from  certain  passages  of  the 
Shepherd  of  Hernias,  that  there  was  no  one  "  elder  " 
who  had  an  acknowledged  claim  to  preside  over  the 
Church,  but  that  it  was  still  under  the  care  of  a 
council  of  presbyters,  and  that  Hermas's  brother 
Pius  must  have  been  the  very  first  "  elder "  who 
succeeded  in  making  himself  a  single  governor  of  the 
Church  of  the  Romans.  Within  forty  years  after- 
ward, according  to  this  view,  everybody  at  Rome  had 
forgotten  the  circumstances,  and  it  was  generally 
understood  that  they  had  had  diocesan  bishops  for  a 
century  !  Nor  does  Eusebius  leave  us  to  depend  on 
Irenaeus  alone  as  his  authority.  He  quotes  Hegesip- 
pus  as  saying  that  he  made  a  list  of  the  Roman 
bishops  down  to  Anicetus,  not  less  than  ten  years 
before  the  visit  of  Irenseus.  It  is  true  that  some 
learned  men  think  that  the  Greek  of  Eusebius  has 
been  miscopied,  and  that  where  we  now  read  "  I 
made  a  succession  down  to  Anicetus,"  we  ought 
rather  to  read  as  the  statement  of  Hegesippus,  "  I 
made  a  visit  till  the  time  of  Anicetus."  If  they  are 
right,  so  much  the  better.  Hegesippus,  eagerly 
collecting  materials  for  a  Church  history,  either  made 
a  list  of  Roman  bishops  within  twenty-five  years 
after  the  time  when  Pius  is  supposed  to  have  made 
himself  the  first  one,  or  else  made  a  visit  in  Rome  in 
the  very  days  of  Pius  himself,  and  made  no  record  of 


Apostles  in  the  Didache.  89 

any  such  interesting  overturn.  All  the  authorities 
consulted  by  Eusebius  seem  to  have  given  him  the 
same  impression,  that  the  transition  from  apostles  to 
diocesan  bishops  was  immediate. 

2.  The  second  witness  shall  be  the  unknown 
author  of  The  Teaching  of  the  Tivelve  Apostles.  We 
want  him  simply  for  one  point,  to  tell  us  whether 
the  office  of  apostles  was  continued  and  extended 
beyond  those  named  in  the  New  Testament.  This 
is  what  he  says  (Chapter  XI.) : 

"  Now  with  regard  to  the  apostles  and  prophets 
according  to  the  decree  of  the  Gospel,  so  do  ye. 
Let  every  apostle  that  cometh  to  you  be  received  as 
the  Lord.  But  he  shall  not  stay  more  than  one  day, 
and  if  need  be,  another  also  :  and  if  he  stay  three 
days,  he  is  a  false  prophet.  And  when  the  apostle 
deparceth,  let  him  take  nothing  except  bread  enough 
till  he  reach  his  next  lodging.  And  if  he  ask  for 
money,  he  is  a  false  prophet." 

We  seem  to  have  here  a  picture  of  a  church  officer 
visiting  a  series  of  rural  communities  who  do  not 
know  his  face,  and  who  do  know  that  false  apostles 
sometimes  impose  themselves  upon  the  Churches. 
"  If  he  ask  for  money,  he  is  a  false  prophet,"  is 
superficially  very  different  from  "  The  bishop  will 
expect  an  offering,  at  every  visitation,  for  diocesan 
missions."  Yet  there  is  no  difference  in  principle. 
A  true  apostle  will  be  in  haste  to  get  on  from  one 
work  to  another,  and  will  ask  nothing  for  himself. 
All  that  is  true  of  the  modern  episcopal  visitation. 

It  is  to  be  noted  further  that  these  Churches  oc- 
casionally visited  by  itinerant  "  apostles  "  are  bidden 


90  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

(Chapter  XV.),  "  Elect  for  yourselves  bishops  and 
deacons,"  as  a  local  ministry.  Apostles,  bishops, 
deacons, — these  are  the  three  orders  of  the  ministry, 
as  in  the  New  Testament.  Some  of  these  have 
supernatural  gifts  of  utterance  in  God's  Name  and 
are  known  as  "  prophets,"  but  there  is  no  hint  that 
the  prophets  are  an  order  of  the  ministry.  A  lay- 
man may  be  a  prophet.  A  man  in  any  of  the  three 
orders  may  be  a  prophet.  The  sham  apostle  is 
declared  to  be  "  a  false  prophet."  The  inference  is 
that  a  genuine  apostle  would  be  expected  to  be  a 
man  having  something  of  the  prophetic  gift.  We 
can  see  also  how  the  gradual  withdrawal  of  super- 
natural gifts  of  a  prophetic  kind  and  the  fear  of  false 
apostles  would  make  a  government  by  itinerant 
apostles,  unknown  by  face  to  the  Churches  which 
they  visited,  more  and  more  undesirable.  A  local- 
ized, steady  oversight  would  be  demanded  in  the 
natural  order  of  things. 

Some  admirable  scholars  take  another  view  of 
these  "  apostles."  They  are  mere  travelling  preach- 
ers, we  are  told,  to  whom  the  Church  gave  the  same 
title  as  to  the  original  Twelve,  but  in  an  entirely 
different  meaning.  The  Jews,  it  is  argued,  used  the 
word  "  apostle  "  for  a  kind  of  Church  messenger  in 
their  arrangements  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem ;  but  it  should  be  added  that  in  their  use  the 
title  was  given  to  a  very  eminent  and  responsible 
officer,  and  in  any  case  there  seems  to  be  no  possibil- 
ity that  these  "apostles  "  of  the  Teaching  were  mes- 
sengers from  one  Church  to  another.  No  such  thing 
is  hinted  at.     The  question  might  naturally  be  asked, 


Prophets   Galled   Chief  Priests.  91 

too,  what  these  "  travelling  preachers  "  were  good 
for,  that  they  should  be  received  "  as  the  Lord  " — a 
most  significant  reference  to  our  Lord's  word  to  the 
Twelve  (St.  Matt.  x.  40),  "  He  that  receiveth  you, 
receiveth  Me," — in  communities  having  already  a 
supply  of  bishops  and  deacons,  some  of  them  en- 
dowed with  the  prophet's  gift  beside.  On  the  whole, 
the  Teaching  seems  to  favor  the  theory  that  the 
Church  had  "apostles"  as  chief  ministers,  and  plenty 
of  them,  till  it  chose  to  give  them  another  name. 

In  Chapter  XIII.,  occurs  a  passage  about  paying 
tithes  to  the  prophets,  "for  they  are  your  chief 
priests."  It  has  been  urged  that  this  is  a  clear  testi- 
mony to  the  writer's  feeling  that  "  inspiration  "  was 
immensely  superior  to  "  order."  A  mere  layman,  it 
is  said,  could,  if  a  prophet,  perform  any  ministry  in 
the  Church,  for  instance,  celebrate  the  Eucharist. 
The  most  stiffly  ecclesiastical  thinker  will  always 
readily  admit  that  Almighty  God  could  at  any  time 
and  in  any  place  call  a  man  to  any  work  of  special 
ministry  (as  certainly  St.  Paul  was  called,  "  not  of 
men"  by  any  human  selection,  "nor  by  man" 
through  any  human  agency,  as  of  ordination)  with- 
out connecting  that  man  back  to  any  successional 
ministry  beginning  from  our  Lord  through  His  early 
apostles.  But  some  of  us  are  loath  to  think  of 
God  as  using  the  method  of  "  special  creation  "  for 
the  Church's  ministry,  any  more  than  for  filling  the 
world  with  the  forms  of  animal  and  vegetable  life. 
Prophets  were  a  splendid  gift  to  the  Church  and  well 
deserved  to  be  supported  by  the  Church,  that  they 
might  be  free  for  teaching  functions.     They  deserved 


92  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

to  be  supported  by  tithes  as  well  as  ever  the  Jewish 
chief  priests  did.  We  do  not  see  that  the  Teaching 
means  more  than  that.  If,  however,  it  is  to  be  taken 
as  meaning  more,  it  must  mean  a  great  deal  more, 
even  that  the  ministry  of  the  Christian  Church  was 
already  clearly  recognized  as  including  a  sacrificing 
priesthood,  such  as  the  ministry  of  the  elder  Church, 
and  that  is  a  conclusion  which  most  Protestant 
scholars  are  quite  unready  to  accept. 

3.  Clement  of  Rome  has  been  often  quoted  by 
writers  on  what  may  be  called  the  Episcopalian  side 
for  something  which  they  can  never  prove  by  him. 
They  represent  him  as  saying  that  the  Apostles  ex- 
pressly provided  that  other  men  should  succeed  to 
their  office.  He  may  have  meant  to  say  that.  More 
probably  he  did  not.  But  he  did  contrive  a  sentence 
that  is  wonderfully  ambiguous.  These  are  his  words 
as  given  in  Lightfoot's  translation  of  Chapter  XLIV. 

"  And  our  Apostles  knew  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  that  there  would  be  strife  over  the  name  of 
the  bishop's  office.  For  this  cause,  therefore,  having 
received  complete  foreknowledge,  they  appointed  the 
aforesaid  persons,  and  afterward  they  provided  a 
[continuance],  that  if  [these]  should  fall  asleep, 
other  approved  men  should  succeed  to  their  minis- 
tration. Those,  therefore,  who  were  appointed  by 
them,  or  afterward  by  other  men  of  repute  with 
the  consent  of  the  whole  Church,  and  have  minis- 
tered unblamabty  to  the  flock  of  Christ  in  lowliness 
of  mind,  peacefully  and  with  all  modesty,  and  for 
long  time  have  borne  a  good  report  with  all, — these 
men  we  consider  to  be  unjustly  thrust  out  from  their 


St.  Clement's  Ambiguity.  93 

administration.  For  it  will  be  no  light  sin  for  us,  if 
we  thrust  out  those  who  have  offered  the  gifts  of  the 
bishop's  office  unblamably  and  holily." 

We  bracket  two  words  in  Bishop  Lightfoot's  trans- 
lation, because  there  is  great  doubt  about-  them. 
Clement  did  not  say  "if  these  should  fall  asleep," 
but  "if  they  should  fall  asleep."  Bishop  Lightfoot 
is  sure  that  he  meant  "  if  these,"  i.  e.,  "  the  aforesaid 
persons"  of  the  next  preceding  clause,  and  the 
writer  of  these  lines  inclines  to  follow  this  sugges- 
tion, but  oh!  how  easy  it  would  have  been  for  St. 
Clement  to  have  said  "  these,"  if  that  really  was  his 
meaning.  As  it  is,  we  cannot  tell  from  the  language 
used  which  of  two  things  he  intended  to  convey, 
whether  that  the  Apostles  provided  that  when  they 
(the  Apostles)  fell  asleep,  other  men  should  succeed 
to  the  apostolic  office,  or  that  the  provision  was  that 
when  they  (the  bishops  and  deacons  formerly  men- 
tioned) fell  asleep,  other  men  should  be  bishops  and 
deacons  in  turn.  It  seems  just  possible  that  the 
good  man  was  ambiguous  on  purpose,  distinctly  in- 
tending that  both  statements  should  be  covered  (and 
intimated)  by  his  phrase.  But  at  any  rate  the  am- 
biguity is  there.  No  one  can  expect  to  prove  from 
Clement  that  the  Apostles  provided  that  they  them- 
selves should  have  successors. 

Nevertheless  there  are  five  little  points  in  this 
brief  passage  which  are  important  as  throwing  light 
on  Clement's  mind,  and  which  are  not  ambiguous  at 
all.  (1)  Our  Apostles  kneiv  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  Clement  believed,  rightly  or  wrongly,  that 
our  Lord  had  personally  interested  Himself,  and  had 


94  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

given  some  direction  to  His  Apostles,  about  the  fu- 
ture  organization   of   the   ministry  of    His   Church. 

(2)  Having  received  complete  foreknowledge.  The 
word  for  "  complete "  is  that  commonly  rendered 
"  perfect."  Surely  Clement  had  seen  nothing,  had 
heard  of  nothing,  in  the  way  of  development  of  the 
offices  of  the  ministry  thus  far,  which  did  not  appear 
to  him  as  having  been  foreseen  by  apostolic  wisdom. 

(3)  They  provided  a  continuance.  Here  there  is  much 
difference  of  opinion  as  to  what  word  Clement  really 
wrote.  A  recent  discovery  of  an  old  Latin  version 
of  this  letter  makes  it  nearly  certain  that  for  "  con- 
tinuance "  we  should  read  "additional  direction." 
But  whether  it  was  a  "  continuance "  or  a  "  direc- 
tion," it  remains  that  Clement  regarded  the  apostles 
not  only  as  having  foreseen  everything  that  would 
make  contention  about  the  ministry,  but  as  having 
made  due  provision  how  the  difficulty  should  be  met. 

(4)  The  strife  that  was  understood  to  have  been  thus 
foreseen  and  provided  for  was  to  be  over  the  name  of 
the  bishop's  office.  At  this  very  time  the  name  of 
"  bishop  "  must  already  have  begun  to  be  used  in  a 
new  way  in  the  regions  of  Asia  Minor  and  Syria, 
and  Clement  must  have  heard  of  it.  The  Ignatian 
letters  will  hardly  allow  us  to  suppose  that  when  the 
second  bishop  of  Antioch  wrote  them,  diocesan  epis- 
copacy had  been  known  less  than  twenty  years.  In 
that  case  Clement  implies  (whatever  the  nature  of 
the  change  may  be  understood  to  be,  and  whether 
we  understand  him  to  have  approved  or  disapproved) 
that  the  Apostles  had  left  distinct  directions  covering 
this  point  one  way  or  the  other.     (5)  Clement  de- 


A  Bishop   Offers  Sacrifice,  95 

scribes  presbyters  as  those  who  have  offered  the  gifts 
of  the  bishop's  office.  As  against  the  theory  of  the 
learned  Dr.  Hatch,  that  the  duties  of  the  ordained 
ministry  were  mainly  secular  at  first,  and  that  all 
particularly  spiritual  offices  might  be  rendered  by 
very  spiritual  laymen  just  as  well,  Clement  chooses 
as  the  very  chief  idea  of  the  office  of  a  presbyter 
the  thought  that  he  is  a  man  who  offers  the  gifts, — 
offers  at  the  Altar  the  great  Christian  Sacrifice  of  the 
Holy  Eucharist.  The  gifts  of  the  bishop  s  office.  The 
Holy  Gifts  belong  to  that  office.  The  Holy  Gifts 
give  the  best  definition  of  that  office.  According  to 
the  view  of  the  primitive  ministry  advanced  by 
Hatch  and  Harnack,  we  ought  certainly  to  have  here, 
"  those  who  have  faithfully  administered  the  Church's 
poor  relief,  and  upheld  firmly  the  Church's  disci- 
pline." 1  But  that  was  not  Clement's  ruling  idea  of 
what  a  presbyter  was  for.  He  is  not  chiefly  preacher, 
or  pastor,  or  teacher,  but  one  who  offers  an  offer- 
ing. 

A  few  words  more  must  be  quoted  from  St.  Clem- 
ent.    He  tells  us  in  Chapter  XL.,  that 

"We  ought  to  do  all  things  in  order,  as  many  as 


1  Since  these  words  were  written  Dr.  McGiffert's  Apostolic  Age 
has  appeared.  On  p.  660  he  implies  that  he  holds  the  "offering 
of  the  gifts  "  here  referred  to  to  be  precisely  the  administration  of 
poor  relief.  But  even  if  it  be  granted  that  "  offering  the  gifts," 
as  equivalent  to  "celebrating  the  Eucharist,"  is  technical  lan- 
guage of  a  later  day,  it  seems  hard  to  understand  how  any  one 
can  take  this  "  offering  "  as  anything  else  than  an  offering  to 
God.  And  coming  before  God  with  an  offering,  even  of  Christian 
men's  alms,  is  a  very  different  thing  to  take  as  the  characteristic 
of  a  man's  work  in  life,  from  an  office  of  distribution  of  charities 
among  the  needy.  The  Clementiue  idea  of  the  ministry  is  that 
it  offers  something — we  need  not  now  decide  what — to  God. 


96  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  Master  hath  commanded  us  to  perform  at  their 
appointed  seasons.  Now  the  offerings  and  ministra- 
tions He  commanded  to  be  performed  with  care,  and 
not  to  be  done  rashly  and  in  disorder,  but  at  fixed 
times  and  seasons.  And  where  and  by  whom  He 
would  have  them  performed,  He  Himself  fixed  by 
His  own  supreme  will,  that  all  things  being  done 
with  piety  according  to  His  good  pleasure,  might  be 
acceptable  to  His  will.  They,  therefore,  that  make 
their  offerings  at  the  appointed  seasons  are  acceptable 
and  blessed  ;  for  while  they  follow  the  institutions  of 
the  Master,  they  cannot  go  wrong.  For  unto  the 
high  priest  his  proper  services  have  been  assigned, 
and  to  the  priests  their  proper  office  is  appointed, 
and  upon  the  Levites  their  proper  ministrations  are 
laid.  The  layman  is  bound  by  the  layman's  ordi- 
nances." 

The  object  of  quoting  this  passage  is  to  show  that 
Clement  was  in  the  habit  of  regarding  a  good  deal 
of  the  Church  order  of  his  day  as  a  matter  of  divine 
law  rather  than  of  human  expediency.  Particular 
attention  may  be  invited  to  two  points.  The  first  is 
that  he  believed  the  Church  to  be  under  a  divine 
command  to  make  certain  offerings  at  particular 
times.  What  offerings?  At  what  times?  The  only 
thing  to  which  the  Church's  practice  points  us 
clearly  is  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist  on  every 
Lord's  Day.  We  may  be  pretty  sure  that,  whether 
rightly  or  wrongly,  Clement,  the  hearer  of  St.  Paul 
and  St.  Peter,  believed  the  Church's  practice  in  that 
particular  to  rest  upon  a  distinct  "  Thus  saith  the 
Lord."     The  second  point  is  that  Clement  found  in 


Hiyli-priests,  Priests,  and  Levites  Now.         97 

the  Church's  system  a  high  priest,  priests,  and  Le- 
vites, or  something  that  could  be  called  by  those 
names,  as  a  matter  of  divine  appointment.  This  is 
stoutly  denied  by  many  scholars.  Bishop  Lightfoot, 
for  instance,  thinks  it  unfair  to  press  the  analogy  of 
three  orders.  All  that  Clement  means,  he  thinks,  is  to 
say,  "  The  Jewish  Church  had  a  fixed  order  from 
God.  We  might  naturally  expect  that  He  would 
wish  the  Christian  Church  to  have  a  fixed  order, 
too."  But  the  present  writer  has  seen  no  discussion 
of  this  important  point, — St.  Clement  does  not  say- 
that  these  things  used  to  be,  as  in  some  former  divine 
order,  but  that  they  are.  It  was  once  argued  gravely 
that  this  letter  must  have  been  written  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  because  all  these  allusions 
are  in  present  tenses.  It  has  been  proved  abundantly, 
and  all  scholars  agree,  that  the  letter  is  fully  twenty- 
five  years  later  than  that  destruction,  and  the  conse- 
quent overthrow  of  the  old  order.  Then  further,  it 
has  been  pointed  out  that  Josephus  speaks  of  such 
things  in  the  present  in  the  same  way,  writing  long 
after  they  had  ceased  to  be.  There  scholarship 
would  seem  to  have  stopped,  but  surely  it  ought  to 
take  one  step  more,  and  answer  the  question  how 
these  men  came  to  use  such  language,  speaking  of 
things  as  still  present  which  belonged  really  to  a 
vanished  past. 

The  two  cases  seem  to  need  different  explanations. 
In  that  of  Josephus,  it  may  be  submitted,  Ave  have 
the  language  of  a  Jew  who  believes  sincerely  that  it 
is  God's  will  that  the  Temple  system  go  on  till  the 
world's  end.  He  regards  the  present  interruption  as 
G 


98  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

a  temporary  trial  of  faith,  and  he  ignores  the  inter- 
ruption. "  The  sacrifices  are  offered  thus  and  so," 
he  says,  because  that  is  the  everlasting  law  of  them  in 
his  belief,  and  he  will  take  no  notice  of  the  fact  that 
they  are  suspended  for  a  while.  In  Clement's  case 
there  can  be  no  such  reason  as  that.  We  must  accept 
him  as  holding  the  order  of  the  Jewish  Church  to  have 
decayed  and  waxed  old  and  to  be  now  gone  forever. 
If  he  uses  the  phrases  of  the  old  order  to  describe 
any  things  as  existing  realities,  it  must  be  because 
he  regards  the  things  of  which  he  so  speaks  as  being 
realities  still,  verily  reproduced  in  the  life  of  the 
Christian  Church.  If  we  are  not  to  take  him  so,  we 
must  make  him  out  to  use  human  language  in  some 
non-human  fashion.  Lightfoot  objects  to  such  a  view 
that  it  would  be  considered  "mere  ingenious  tri- 
fling "  to  hunt  out  Christian  analogies  for  Clement's 
reference  to  different  forms  of  Old  Testament  sacri- 
fice in  the  succeeding  chapter,  but  he  overlooks  the 
fact,  which  really  ought  to  be  made  known  to  good 
people  of  to-day,  that  most  Christians  of  that  time 
would  not  have  thought  it  trifling  at  all.  Every 
form  of  Jewish  sacrifice  was  believed  to  be  a  "type," 
filled  with  Christian  meaning,  and  to  have  analogies 
in  the  Christian  Eucharist.  Almost,  if  not  quite, 
every  sort  of  Christian  mind  believed  in  what  is 
called  "mystical  interpretation."  Even  against  so 
great  a  scholar,  and  interpreter,  also,  as  Bishop 
Lightfoot,  it  may  be  maintained  that  Clement  does 
assert  the  presence  of  a  high  priest,  priests,  and  Le- 
vites,  all  three,  in  the  order  of  the  Christian  minis- 
try.    They  would  be,  of  course,  the  apostle,  bishops, 


In  the  Mind  of  Jesus   Christ. 


and  deacons,  of  the  Teaching,  the  bishop,  presbyters, 
and  deacons  of  the  Ignatian  phraseology. 

4.  St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch  has  already  assured  us 
of  the  presence  of  bishops  (in  the  sense  of  single 
governors  of  Churches)  in  Syria  and  Asia  Minor 
about  the  time  of  the  death  of  the  Apostle  St.  John. 
It  remains  still  to  ask  whether  he  regarded  the 
bishop's  office  as  a  matter  of  good,  wise  human  judg- 
ment, or  as  of  divine  ordering.  Three  passages, 
from  as  many  different  letters,  will  tell  us  as  much 
as  we  can  learn  of  his  view. 

(a)  In  Ephesians  III.  he  says,  "  Jesus  Christ  also, 
our  inseparable  Life,  is  the  mind  of  the  Father,  even 
as  the  bishops  that  are  settled  in  the  farthest  parts 
of  the  earth  are  in  the  mind  of  Jesus  Christ." 

Now  Ignatius  may  have  been  right  or  wrong 
about  his  facts.  We  are  at  liberty  to  suspect  that 
he  exaggerated  his  expression  somewhat  beyond  his 
real  opinion.  But  after  all  allowances,  this  is  testi- 
mony too  strong  to  be  set  aside  that  the  diocesan 
bishop  was  by  this  time  established  in  a  considerable 
portion  of  the  Church.  "  Farthest  parts  of  the  earth  " 
may  be  a  very  great  exaggeration,  but  it  simply  could 
not  be  said  by  a  man  who  knew  all  the  time  that 
the  thing  was  not  true  of  great,  conspicuous  Church 
centres  such  as  Rome,  Alexandria,  Corinth,  Jeru- 
salem, Csesarea,  to  name  none  about  which  he  can 
fairly  be  supposed  to  have  been  mistaken.  But 
what  (for  this  is  still  more  important)  does  Ignatius 
mean  by  "in  the  mind  of  Christ"?  Bishop  Light- 
foot  rejects  the  interpretation  "  by  the  will  of 
Christ,"  which  certainly  would  not  be  a  fair  transla- 


100  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tion  of  the  Greek  phrase,  and  says  that  the  bishops 
are  represented  as  "sharing  the  mind  of  Christ." 
Would  not  the  natural  way  to  say  that  be,  that  "the 
mind  of  Christ  was  in  them  "  ?  Let  us  look  closely 
at  both  sides  of  what  we  must  carefully  observe  to 
be  a  comparison.  Here  is  a  parallel  between  two 
facts,  and  the  heavenly  is  "  even  as  "  the  earthly. 
The  higher,  heavenly  fact  is  that  our  Lord  is  the 
mind  of  the  Father,  not,  of  course,  the  instrument  by 
which  the  Father  thinks,  but  the  expressed  judg- 
ment of  the  Father,  the  uttered  purpose  of  the 
Father,  the  mind  made  known.  This  relation  of  the 
Son  as  the  expression  of  the  Father's  mind  is  a  close 
parallel  to  a  well-known  earthly  fact,  that  these  fast 
multiplying  bishops,  spreading  out  into  the  remote 
places  of  the  earth,  "  are  in,"  form  a  part  of,  "  the  ex- 
pressed judgment,"  "  the  uttered  purpose,"  "  t>he 
mind  made  known,"  of  the  Divine  Son  Himself. 
With  all  the  parallelism,  too,  there  is  a  significant 
difference.  Oar  Lord  is  the  mind  of  the  Father. 
The  bishops  are  in  the  mind  of  the  Son.  They  are 
but  a  part  of  what  he  has  to  say.  Yet  also,  a  part  of 
what  he  has  to  say,  they  really  are. 

(b)  In  Magnesians  VI.  we  have  a  famous  pas- 
sage : 

"Be  ye  zealous  to  do  all  things  in  godly  concord, 
the  bishop  presiding  after  the  likeness  of  God,  and 
the  presbyters  after  the  likeness  of  the  council  of  the 
Apostles,  with  the  deacons  also,  who  are  most  dear  to 
me,  having  been  entrusted  with  the  diaconate  of 
Jesus  Christ,  who  was  with  the  Father  before  the 
worlds  and  appeared  at  the  end  of  time." 


Presbyters  Called  Successors  of  Ajwstles.       101 

Certain  scholars  have  insisted  eagerly  that  Igna- 
tius here  recognizes  an  older  idea,  that  the  presby- 
ters were  the  true  successors  of  the  Apostles,  the 
bishop  being  an  ecclesiastical  afterthought  for  whom 
something  had  to  be  provided,  so  this  bishop  of  more 
than  vaulting  ambition  compares  his  office  to  that  of 
God  Himself!  It  must  be  acknowledged  that  the 
martyr  sometimes  indulged  in  a  sprawling  luxuriance 
of  comparison.  Here  and  in  another  passage  soon  to 
be  quoted,  he  parallels  the  deacons  of  each  Church 
to  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself.  But  there  is 
always  an  underlying  thought.  Whence  then  comes 
this  idea  of  comparing  the  presbyters  to  "  the  coun- 
cil of  the  Apostles  "  ?  In  a  Church  service  of  some- 
what later  times  we  know  that  the  bishop  sat  behind 
the  altar  at  the  upper  end  of  the  place  of  meeting, 
with  his  presbyters  arranged  on  either  side  of  him  in 
a  semicircle.  Ignatius,  who  compares  the  presby- 
ters to  a  crown,  had  probably  seen  the  same  arrange- 
ment, and  it  suggested  to  his  quick  fancy  the  idea  of 
our  Lord,  "  God  manifest  in  the  flesh,"  with  His 
Apostles  gathered  about  Him.  Again,  it  may  have 
suggested,  if  Ignatius  knew  the  Revelation  of  St. 
John,  that  vision  in  the  fourth  chapter  where  the 
throne  of  God  was  seen,  and  around  it  four  and 
twenty  elders,  representing,  apparently,  by  a  combi- 
nation of  the  number  of  the  twelve  patriarchs  and  that 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles  the  worship  of  both  the  elder 
and  the  later  Church.  Either  way,  or  both  ways, 
Ignatius  would  be  brought  to  think  of  the  bishop  as 
presiding  "  after  the  likeness,"  or  as  some  read  it, 
"  in    the    place  "  of  God,   while  the  presbyters  are 


102  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

gathered  about  him,  as  the  Apostles  were  once 
gathered  around  the  Divine  Man,  the  Representative 
of  the  Father  here  on  earth.  But  suppose  that  Igna- 
tius had  been  asked  to  make  the  same  picture  illus- 
trate the  life  of  the  Church  in  the  days  of  St.  Paul. 
Can  any  one  doubt  that  then  he  would  have  de- 
scribed each  apostle  of  the  Church,  wherever  he 
might  come,  as  presiding  in  the  place,  or  likeness,  of 
God,  while  the  presbyters  were  gathered  around  that 
apostle  in  the  likeness  of  the  council  gathered  about 
the  Lord,  which  had  itself  consisted  of  apostles,  so 
few  years  before  ?  To  Ignatius's  thought,  undoubt- 
edly, the  Apostles  had  had  two  very  different  posi- 
tions at  different  periods  in  their  experience.  In  our 
Lord's  earthly  ministry  they  had  been  helpers  to  the 
Church's  chief  minister.  After  our  Lord's  earthly 
ministry  was  over,  they  were  made  to  be  in  a  sense 
chief  ministers  themselves.  The  Church's  presbyters 
succeeded  in  due  time  to  the  former  function  of  the 
Apostles  as  helpers  of  the  chief  minister.  At  a  later 
day  officers  under  the  name  of  bishops  were  found 
succeeding  to  that  other  function  of  the  apostles  as 
chief  ministers  in  the  likeness  of  the  invisible  Divine 
Head.  Ignatius  certainly  did  not  mean  to  exalt  the 
bishop  of  his  day  above  the  original  Apostles,  but 
when  he  presents  the  bishop  as  "  presiding  after  the 
likeness  of  God,"  he  certainly  claims  for  him  that  he 
holds  in  turn  the  fulness  of  the  original  Apostles' 
authority. 

One  more  quotation,  and  we  have  done  with  this 
long  study  of  controversy.  In  the  letter  to  the 
Church  of  Tr alien  (Chapter  III.),  we  find  this : 


Apart  from  These,  No   Church.  103 

"  In  like  manner  let  all  men  respect  the  deacons 
as  Jesus  Christ,  even  as  they  should  respect  the 
bishop  as  being  a  type  of  the  Father,  and  the  presby- 
ters as  the  council  of  God  and  as  the  council  of 
Apostles.  Apart  from  these  there  is  not  even  the 
name  of  a  Church." 

"Apart  from  these  no  Church  is  called  [so],"  is 
the  more  literal  rendering  of  the  last  phrase,  but 
Bishop  Lightfoot's  version  seems  to  give  the  only 
possible  meaning.  One  may  guess  that  if  Ignatius 
could  have  foreseen  how  the  history  of  the  Church 
would  unfold  itself  in  these  later  days,  he  would 
not  have  spoken  quite  so  strongly.  Certainly  the 
"man  composed  unto  union  "  would  have  wept  with 
passionate  grief  over  the  vision  of  a  Church  divided 
into  denominations  owning  no  common  discipline 
and  keeping  no  single  standard  of  the  faith.  On  the 
other  hand,  he  who  wrote  the  phrase  "  where  Jesus 
is,  there  is  the  Catholic  Church,"  would  have  felt 
obliged,  we  may  think,  to  acknowledge  that  a  con- 
gregation of  very  members  of  Christ,  meeting  con- 
stantly together  for  praise  and  prayer,  and  maintain- 
ing a  high  standard  of  righteous  living  and  loving 
self-devotion,  under  the  guiding  ministry  of  a 
"prophet"  only,  apart  from  any  offices  of  bishop  or 
presbyter  or  deacon  in  the  Ignatian  meaning  of  those 
words,  was  still  a  great  spiritual  fact,  which  must  be 
called  a  Church  of  Christ.  But  having  thus  essayed 
to  tell  what  would  have  been  the  utterance  of 
Ignatius  in  the  nineteenth  or  twentieth  century,  we 
must  in  justice  return  to  what  he  did  say  in  the  be- 
ginning  of   the  second,   "  Apart  from  these," — the 


104  The  Post -Apostolic  Age. 

three  orders  of  bishop,  presbyters,  and  deacons, — 
"  there  is  not  even  the  name  of  a  church."  That 
sentence  shows  two  things  concerning  the  mind  of 
Ignatius:  first,  that  he  thought  this  ministry,  while 
in  some  ways  a  new  order  of  things,  was  substan- 
tially the  same  as  that  under  which  Churches  had 
been  living  for  two  or  three  generations  before ;  and 
secondly,  that  this  ministry  of  three  orders,  under 
either  kind  of  head,  the  itinerant  apostle,  or  the 
diocesan  bishop,  was  something  far  above  the  level 
of  any  clever  device  of  human  policy. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  EMPIRE:  I.  PERSECUTIONS 
AND  APOLOGISTS,  TO  THE  DEATH  OF  ST.  POLY- 
CARP. 

E  have  seen  the  Church  perfecting  its  or- 
ganization within,  to  adapt  it  to  the  work 
that  lay  before  it.  We  must  now  turn 
our  attention  to  the  Church's  relation  to 
the  powers  that  were  without.  The 
relation  of  the  Church  to  the  Roman  Empire  has 
lately  been  made  the  subject  of  interesting  studies 
by  two  English  writers,  Professor  W.  M.  Ramsay, 
of  the  University  of  Aberdeen,  The  Church  in  the 
Roman  Empire  before  A.  D.  170,  and  an  Oxford 
scholar,  E.  G.  Hardy,  Christianity  and  the  Roman 
Government.  Both  agree  that  by  the  time  of  Domit- 
ian  (A.  D.  81-96)  it  was  a  settled  polic}r  of  the 
Roman  Emperors  to  treat  Christianity  as  a  crime. 
As  to  the  time  when  this  condition  began  to  be, 
it  seems  best  to  follow  Mr.  Hardy's  view,  supported 
as  it  is  by  the  great  German  scholar,  Mommsen. 
This  traces  the  establishment  of  such  a  policy  to 
Nero.  After  the  great  fire  of  Rome,  as  we  learn 
from  the  historian  Tacitus,  Nero,  suspected  of 
causing  that  awful  disaster  himself,  tried  to  torn 
the  current  of  popular  feeling  by  charging  the  crime 
upon  the  Christian  community.     It  would  seem  that 

105 


106  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

even  in  the  eyes  of.  the  Roman  judge  the  charge  of 
incendiarism  broke  down  utterly.  But  the  testi- 
mony taken  was  made  the  foundation  of  a  charge 
more  dangerous  by  far, — hostility  to  mankind  in 
general,  in  technical  Latin,  odium  generis  humani. 

It  has  often  been  enquired  under  what  law  of  the 
Roman  Empire  Christians  could  have  been  brought 
before  the  courts,  and  the  imperial  jealousy  against 
secret  societies  and  even  against  clubs  and  societies 
not  understood  to  have  any  secret  character,  is  much 
referred  to.  There  was  such  a  jealousy.  We  even 
find  an  emperor  directing  one  of  his  provincial 
governors  to  refuse  permission  for  the  organizing  of 
a  fire-company  in  a  large  town.  Men  were  not  to 
be  allowed  to  organize  at  all.  Then  there  would  be 
no  seditious  organizations.  Yet  organizations  were 
very  numerous  in  the  Empire.  There  was  some 
such  craze  for  them  as  we  see  to-day.  The  imperial 
law  made  exceptions  in  favor  of  mutual  benefit 
clubs,  and  rather  especially  in  favor  of  burial  clubs, 
and  probably  any  Christian  congregation  could  have 
made  itself  into  such  a  society  as  Roman  law  would 
commonly  license.  Only  the  jealous  law  was  so 
strict  that  when  any  society  was  suspected  of  having 
a  treasonable  character,  it  was  easy  to  find  an  ex- 
cuse for  suppressing  it.  According  to  Hardy  and 
Mommsen,  however,  Christians  were  not  generally 
proceeded  against  under  any  law  at  all.  Under  the 
highly  practical  Roman  system,  whatever  was  held 
to  be  "  dangerous  to  the  State  "  came  under  what 
we  may  call  the  police  jurisdiction  of  the  magistrates, 
a  jurisdiction  reaching  even  to  sentences  of  torture 


Causes  of  Dislike  for    Christians.  107 

and  death,  without  the  necessity  of  quoting  any  law 
at  all. 

"Hostility  to  mankind  "  was  obviously  a  danger 
to  the  state.  How  could  such  a  charge  be  plausibly 
maintained?  Hardy  gives  five  causes  of  popular  or 
governmental  dislike  for  Christians,  any  of  which 
might  help  to  give  such  an  impression  of  the  Chris- 
tian character. 

1.  Disinclination  to  marriage.  It  is  easy  to  exag- 
gerate this.  We  must  remember  that  St.  Paul  had 
condemned  "  forbidding  to  marry  "  as  one  of  the 
false  teachings  that  should  trouble  the  Church  in 
evil  days.  Yet  the  same  St.  Paul  advised  the  Co- 
rinthians that  in  times  of  persecution  and  difficulty 
the  unmarried  were  going  to  be  far  better  off  than 
those  who  had  encumbered  themselves  with  family 
cares,  and  certainly  there  must  have  been  repeated 
refusals  to  make  otherwise  advantageous  marriages 
into  heathen  families.  One  can  see  how  the  heathen 
families  would  feel.  "  Common  humanity  is  not  good 
enough  for  these  people  to  intermarry  with,"  they 
would  say.  "  They  despise  and  hate  the  world  in 
which  they  dwell." 

2.  Interference  with  family  property.  Hardy 
seems  to  write  as  if  community  of  goods  like  that 
of  the  Jerusalem  Christians  at  the  beginning  (Acts 
iv.  and  v.)  prevailed  among  Christians  (1)  generally 
and  (2)  for  generations,  both  being  suppositions  con- 
trary to  fact.  Even  at  Jerusalem  it  was  not  a  law. 
What  every  man  had  was  his  own.  Only  it  became 
a  pretty  general  practice  for  men  to  give  all  that 
they  had  for  the  common  need  in  a  certain  extraor- 


108  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

dinary  emergency.  Still  emergencies  of  special 
need  came  often.  A  rich  man  becoming  the  slave 
of  Jesus  Christ  would  feel  that  the  Christian  king- 
dom had  immense  claims  on  his  property.  Doubt- 
less cases  came  up  in  which  heathen  relatives  found 
the  ties  of  blood  disregarded,  and  great  family  prop- 
erties wasted,  as  they  would  hold,  in  favor  of  a 
swarm  of  foreign  parasites.  Here  again  would  come 
a  cry,  "  These  Christians  learn  to  hate  their  own 
flesh  and  blood."  Our  Lord  Himself  said,  "  If  any 
man  come  to  me,  and  hate  not  his  father,  and  mother, 
and  wife,  and  children,  and  brethren,  and  sisters,  yea, 
and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot  be  My  disciple" 
(St.  Luke  xiv.  26).  It  may  well  be  imagined  how 
an  incautious  quotation  of  such  a  saying  before 
heathen  hearers  might  give  rise  first  to  misunder- 
standing of  the  meaning,  then  to  distortion  of  the 
words,  and  so  to  a  telling  piece  of  evidence  as  to  the 
dark  misanthropy  of  the  new  sect. 

3.  Conscientious  refused  to  live  like  other  people. 
Christians  could  not  illuminate  their  houses  and 
put  wreaths  of  flowers  and  green  on  their  gates  for 
a  heathen  festival.  They  could  not  accept  offices 
under  the  government  which  included  the  perform- 
ance of  heathen  religious  rites.  As  to  social  life 
consciences  differed.  Some  Christians  felt  that  they 
could  not  go  to  weddings,  to  funerals,  to  ceremonies 
at  a  coming  of  age,  in  the  houses  of  heathen  friends. 
Others  followed  a  rule  to  which  even  the  severe 
Tertullian  gave  his  sanction  at  the  beginning  of  the 
third  century.  They  could  not  go  anywhere  "to 
assist  at  a  sacrifice,"  but  they  might  go  "to  serve  a 


Witchcraft  and  Immorality   Charged.         109 

friend,"  even  to  a  place  where  they  knew  that 
heathen  rites  would  be.  The  Letter  to  Diognetus,  an 
apologetic  writing  of  the  middle  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, claims  that  the  Christians  "  are  marked  by  no 
peculiar  usages,"  but  most  heathen  observers  would 
have  thought  differently. 

Perhaps  it  should  be  mentioned  here  that  the 
Christians  did  take  a  very  severe  view  of  the  heathen 
world  and  its  probable  fate.  "Probable,"  indeed, 
was  no  word  of  theirs.  Whosoever  was  not  a  Chris- 
tian was  certainly  on  the  road  to  an  everlasting  hell. 
That  was  the  idea  of  most  Christians,  and  they  took 
delight  in  the  prospect.  Zeal  for  souls  as  possible 
objects  of  salvation  was  common.  Love  of  souls 
that  seemed  to  be  obstinately  refusing  salvation  was 
rare.  Many  a  Christian  gave  his  heathen  neighbors 
some  justification  for  thinking  him  sour  and  hateful 
toward  all  that  did  not  agree  with  him. 

4.  Charges  of  witchcraft  and  abominable  immo- 
rality. Strange  as  it  may  seem  to  us,  these  were 
really  widely  believed.  The  secrecy  of  Christian 
rites  gave  much  reason  for  the  suspicion.  In  those 
horribly  evil  days  what  was  secret  generally  ivas 
abominable.  Then  a  few  words  caught  up  by  lis- 
tening slaves  and  other  spies,  about  a  certain  mys- 
terious eating  of  "  flesh  "  and  "  blood,"  and  probably 
the  carrying  of  occasional  infants  to  the  places  of 
Christian  assembly,  really  for  the  innocent  purpose 
of  securing  their  Baptism,  would  be  enough  to  con- 
dense the  mist  of  suspicion  into  a  bloody  rain  of  ac- 
cusations of  cannibal  feasts.  Furthermore,  the  cast- 
ing out  of    evil  spirits,  which  had    certainly  been 


110  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

known  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  and  was  confidently 
claimed  to  be  one  of  the  Church's  gifts  in  the  next 
two  centuries,  would  only  confirm  in  a  certain  class 
of  unbelievers  the  suspicion  that  the  Christians  were 
in  league  with  powers  of  darkness.  Once  start  in 
a  heathen  population  the  notion  that  Christians 
practised  magic  arts,  and  then  so  simple  a  matter  as 
the  Christians'  habit  of  signing  themselves  with  the 
sign  of  the  cross  on  all  manner  of  occasions  would 
do  much  to  feed  the  fear.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the 
horrible  punishments  devised  for  Christians  in  Nero's 
persecution  were  exaggerations  of  those  prescribed 
in  Roman  law  for  magicians.  Accomplices  in  magical 
practices  were  to  be  thrown  to  wild  beasts,  or  cruci- 
fied, and  magicians  themselves  were  to  be  burned 
alive.  Nero's  martyrs  were  wrapped  in  skins  of 
wild  beasts  and  exposed  to  savage  dogs,  or  smeared 
with  pitch,  and  then  fastened  to  crosses  and  set  on 
fire. 

5.  Supreme  loyalty  to  a  law  outside  the  Roman 
law.  The  Roman  authorities  cared  more  for  this 
point  than  for  all  other  allegations  against  Chris- 
tianity together.  Here  was  a  body  of  people  who 
openly  professed  that  they  served  a  God  whose 
will  was  their  supreme  authority,  and  that  if  at  any 
point  the  law  of  the  Empire  came  into  conflict  with 
the  law  of  their  God,  they  should  certainly  obey  their 
God  and  defy  the  Empire.  Also  they  were  zealous 
proselytizers,  adding  to  their  number  daily,  and  rap- 
idly enlarging  this  constant  menace  of  treasonable 
example.  Perhaps  it  is  hard  to  realize  the  intensity 
of  bitterness  which  this  discovery  created.     It  ought 


The  State  Jealous  of  a  Higher  Law.         Ill 

to  be  very  easy.  Now  and  then  in  our  own  day  con- 
troversialists grow  excited,  clever  politicians  work 
themselves  into  a  frenzy,  even  powerful  governments 
take  alarm,  lest  the  power  of  Roman  Catholic  princi- 
ples over  Roman  Catholic  consciences  should  prove 
dangerous  to  the  State.  It  is  felt  that  any  govern- 
ment containing  a  large  mass  of  citizens  pledged  be- 
forehand to  refuse  obedience  to  laws  which  the  gov- 
ernment might  conceivably  find  it  desirable  to  enact, 
is  a  government  in  a  condition  of  unstable  equilib- 
rium. That  is  true  in  theory,  at  least.  Practically, 
the  Roman  government  could  have  made  the  Church 
of  Christ  one  of  the  strongest  defenses  of  the  Em- 
pire. Constantine,  as  first  Christian  Emperor,  did 
so.  But  the  suggestion  that  a  certain  group  of 
people  will  in  any  circumstances  set  up  a  supposed 
higher  law  as  a  reason  for  refusing  obedience  to  the 
law  of  the  Civil  State,  is  always  irritating  and  too 
often  maddening  to  rulers  who  have  no  conscience 
for  anything  higher  than  human  law.1 

From  all  these  causes  together  Christianity  was 


1In  1888  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Kansas  passed  a  form 
of  "Prohibitory  Law,"  omittiDg  the  usual  exception  allowing  the 
use  of  wine  for  sacramental  purposes.  This  was  a  direct  attack 
on  the  conscience  of  all  Christian  persons  who  had  not  embraced 
the  (so-called)  Two  "Wine  Theory,  and  more  especially  upon  the 
Episcopalian  and  Reman  Churches,  which  officially  hold  that 
"wine"  means  wine.  If  the  politicians  had  not  given  way, 
there  must  have  been  a  wide-spread  persecution.  Here  is  a  clear 
case  of  a  government  impeded  in  legislation  by  obstructive  con- 
sciences, but  jjrobably  no  one  will  maintain  that  the  welfare  of 
Kansas  was  seriously  endangered  by  the  presence  of  the  con- 
sciences in  question.  Yet  it  is  very  common  even  to-day  for  men 
to  maintain  that  no  man  can  be  a  perfectly  loyal  citizen  who  ac- 
knowledges that  if  a  law  interfered  with  his  conscience  he  would 
not  obey  that  law. 


112  The  Post-Apostolic  Age, 

unpopular  in  general  society  and  regarded  as  a  dan- 
gerous force  by  the  authorities.  Imperial  policy, 
having  come  to  hold  the  "hostility  to  mankind" 
theory  at  the  beginning  of  our  period,  maintained  it 
without  official  change  to  the  end.  Yet  it  should  be 
noted  that  the  conditions  of  the  Church  as  a  perse- 
cuted body  varied  from  emperor  to  emperor,  and 
even  from  season  to  season.  The  Roman  government 
was  immensely  practical.  In  theory,  Christianity 
was  a  thing  to  be  crushed  out.  In  practice,  that 
would  be  hard  to  do,  and  it  seemed  quite  enough  to 
watch  the  course  of  things,  and  simply  do  something 
about  the  matter  when  there  seemed  to  be  par- 
ticular indications  that  something  needed  to  be 
done.  To  be  a  Christian  was  to  be  an  outlaw.  A 
Christian  might  be  proceeded  against  any  day.  For 
that  very  reason  it  was  not  necessary  to  be  doing  it 
every  day.  In  fact,  the  position  of  a  Christian  in  the 
Roman  Empire  in  the  second  or  third  century  was 
curiously  like  that  of  a  liquor-dealer  in  an  American 
State  which  has  a  general  Prohibitory  Law,  to-day. 
There  is  a  powerful  human  instinct  working  against 
the  law  every  moment.  The  officers  of  the  law  do  not 
feel  convinced  that  absolute  enforcement  of  this  regu- 
lation is  either  necessary  or  possible.  They  aim  at 
keeping  the  thing  within  what  seem  to  them  as  prac- 
tical men  "  reasonable  bounds."  They  have  spasms 
of  enforcement.  They  fall  into  long,  neglectful  tor- 
pors of  non-enforcement.  They  do  not  theorize. 
They  have  no  stern  convictions.  They  despise  the 
business  and  those  who  follow  it,  but  their  handling 
of  it  is  dictated  by  policy  at  every  turn.     Just  so 


Causes  of  Danger  to    Christians.  113 

was  Christianity  regarded  by  the  administrators  of 
Roman  law. 

Of  course,  then,  popular  feeling  had  a  great  deal 
to  do  with  the  matter.  Indeed,  to  a  Roman  magis- 
trate there  could  hardly  be  a  greater  reason  for  pro- 
ceeding against  a  suspected  society  than  that  it 
tended  to  stir  the  general  population  to  acts  of  vio- 
lence, or  that  there  was  found  to  be  a  general  feel- 
ing that  the  government  was  dealing  weakly  with  an 
acknowledged  cause  of  offense.  No  matter  whether 
the  victims  of  mob  violence  deserved  ill  of  their 
neighbors  or  not,  mob  violence  was  not  a  good  thing 
to  have  in  the  community,  and  the  hard-headed 
Roman  policy  did  not  care  much  for  abstract  justice. 
It  was  not  going  to  give  any  license  to  conditions, 
even  though  innocent  in  themselves,  which  would 
probably  lead  to  popular  uprisings.  And  we  may 
remind  ourselves  that  the  Roman  magistracy  did  not 
believe  that  Christianity  was  a  force  innocent  in  it- 
self. 

As  to  the  amount  of  danger  from  popular  move- 
ments, in  which  Christians  had  to  live,  we  may  note 
two  forces  that  specially  worked  against  them,  one 
pretty  constant,  the  other  highly  variable.  The  con- 
stant cause  was  the  hatred  of  the  Jews.  It  varied 
little  in  its  bitter  watchfulness  to  do  harm.  The 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  under  Titus  (A.  D.  70) 
gave  a  great  impulse  to  that  extremity  of  ill-will,  no 
doubt,  and  the  flame  may  have  been  fanned  higher 
by  the  second  destruction,  after  the  revolt  of  Bar 
Cochba  (A.  D.  132-5),  when  the  Emperor  Hadrian 
caused  a  new  city  named  Aelia  Capitolina,  from  his 
H 


114  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

own  name,  Aelius^  to  be  built  upon  the  sacred  site, 
and  enacted  that  no  Jew  should  come  within  its 
gates.  The  more  variable  cause  of  popular  out- 
breaks lay  in  the  superstitions  of  heathendom. 
Floods,  earthquakes,  tornadoes,  droughts,  pestilences, 
crop-failures,  hard  times,  all  these  were  traceable  to 
offended  gods,  and  who  so  offensive  to  the  gods  as 
these  Christians,  who  certainly  worshipped  none  of 
the  objects  of  their  neighbors'  fear,  and  were  popu- 
larly understood  to  worship  no  god  at  all  ? 

II.  From  the  general  survey  of  the  relations  be- 
tween the  Christian  Kingdom  and  the  great  Empire 
of  Rome,  we  turn  to  consider  a  little  more  in  detail 
the  actual  working  of  the  policy  of  persecution  and 
the  Church's  endeavors  in  its  own  defense.  Domit- 
ian  (A.  D.  81-96)  seems  to  have  been  a  persecuting 
emperor  somewhat  particularly.  It  was  in  this 
reign,  according  to  Irenseus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  who 
would  get  his  information  from  Polycarp,  Bishop  of 
Smyrna,  who  had  known  St.  John  personally,  that 
the  beloved  disciple  was  an  exile  in  the  island  of 
Patmos  and  saw  the  Revelation  which  taught  the 
true  meaning  of  this  world's  tragical  history.  The 
short  reign  of  Nerva  (A.  D.  96-98)  leaves  no  trace 
in  our  story.  Out  of  the  period  of  Trajan  (A.  D. 
98-117),  there  emerges  an  interesting  piece  of  his- 
tory. Pliny  the  Younger,  a  cultivated  Roman  law- 
yer, is  sent  out  to  govern  for  the  two  years  111-113 
the  province  of  Bithynia-Pontus.  In  that  prov- 
ince, where  sixty  years  before  St.  Paul  had  been 
prevented  from  preaching  the  Gospel  because  he  was 
more    needed   elsewhere  (Acts  xvi.  7),  some  lesser 


First  Account  of  Christian    Worship.         115 

founders  had  done  a  great  work.  The  new  gover- 
nor had  an  anonymous  paper  presented  to  him, 
charging  many  persons  with  being  Christians.  Some 
denied  it,  and  these  supported  their  denial  by  wor- 
shipping images  of  heathen  gods  and  a  representa- 
tion of  the  emperor,1  and  repeating  heathen  formulas 
at  the  governor's  dictation.  Others  acknowledged 
themselves  Christians,  and  showed  such  obstinacy  of 
disrespect  for  the  official  view  of  their  behavior  as  a 
crime,  that  Pliny  ordered  them  off  to  execution,  de- 
claring that  that  alone  was  sufficient  cause."  Others 
still  declared  that  they  had  been  Christians  once, 
but  had  long  ceased  to  be,  some  even  as  much  as 
twenty  years  before.  Even  these  maintained  that 
the  worst  that  they  had  ever  done  was  to  meet  before 
daylight  on  a  fixed  day,  and  sing  antiphonally  a 
hymn  to  Christ  as  God,  binding  themselves  by  an 
oath  (sacra?nento)  not  to  the  commission  of  any  crime, 
but  simply  not  to  be  guilty  of  theft,  robbery,  or 
adulteiy,  not  to  break  a  promise,  nor  keep  back  a 
pledge.  Then  they  used  to  separate,  and  assemble 
again  later  for  a  common  meal,  in  which,  however, 
there  was  nothing  out  of  the  way.  This  last,  they 
said,  had  been  given  up  in  consequence  of  an  im- 
perial edict  about  social  clubs,  an  edict  which  Pliny 
himself  had  published  not  long  before. 

1  As  early  as  the  reign  of  Dornitian  the  Roman  Emperor  had 
allowed  himself  to  he  called  divine,  and  to  he  made  an  object  of 
worship  as  representing  the  Genius  (the  Guardian  Spirit)  of  the 
empire.  It  come  to  he  one  of  the  most,  common  tests  of  Chris- 
tians to  ask  them  to  worship  the  image  of  the  Emperor  and  to 
swear  by  the  Genius  of  the  Emperor.  u Per  sahitem  Imperatoris" 
"by  the  health  and  safely  of  the  Emperor  "  they  were  willing  to 
swear;  by  his  Genius,  they  would  not. 


116  The  Post-Apostolic  Aye. 

This  is  our  first  glimpse  of  Christian  worship  in 
the  Post- Apostolic  Age,  a  subject  which  must  have  a 
chapter  to  itself.  What  is  to  be  noted  now  is  that 
this  new  religion  was  found  to  have  taken  hold  of  all 
the  cities  of  the  district,  and  to  have  spread  into  the 
villages  and  even  into  the  open  country.  The 
heathen  temples  had  been  left  solitary,  this  Roman 
governor  tells  us,  and  their  ceremonies  had  fallen 
into  disuse.  It  was  a  very  rare  thing  to  find  any- 
body buying  animals  for  heathen  sacrifices,  so  that 
the  trade  in  that  line  was  seriously  impaired.  No 
doubt,  part  of  this  evidence  of  changed  conditions 
of  belief  was  negative.  Not  all  the  people  who  had 
given  up  the  heathen  religions  had  taken  up  another 
religion  instead,  and  so  when  Pliny  tells  us  that  now 
the  temples  were  frequented  again,  and  the  trade  in 
the  materials  of  heathen  worship  reviving,  we  are 
not  to  suppose  that  all  these  newly  interested  per- 
sons were  apostate  Christians.  But  certain  it  is 
that  of  Christians  there  was  a  great  company,  and 
that  Christianity  had  become  so  far  a  popular  re- 
ligion as  to  have  its  "  mixed  multitude  "  of  follow- 
ers, some  of  whom  would  in  time  of  persecution 
fall  away. 

In  such  conditions  Pliny  takes  advice.  He  lias 
examined  by  torture  two  slave  women  such  as  the 
Christians  call  ministrce, — this  must  be  Pliny's  Latin 
for  "  deaconesses,"  though  the  Latin-speaking  Church 
made  for  them  later  a  title  adapted  from  the  Greek, 
diacoiiissce, — and  all  he  has  found  is  "  an  offensive 
and  irrational  superstition."  It  seems  plain  that  this 
Roman  judge  was  inwardly  convinced  that  the  vul- 


The  Dechion  of  Trajan.  117 

gar  charges  about  Christian  crimes  were  unfounded. 
Now  he  writes  for  instruction.  Is  he  to  make  a  dif- 
ference between  young  and  old,  strong  and  weak  ? 
Is  he  to  accept  renunciation  of  Christianity  without 
punishment  for  the  past  ?  Is  he  to  punish  Christians 
simply  for  being  Christians,  "  for  the  name,"  on  the 
ground  that  Christians  are  recognized  evil  deers,  or 
only  for  particular  misdeeds  which  they  can  be 
shown  to  have  done  ? 

The  Emperor  answers  that  no  hard  and  fast  rule 
can  be  made  which  will  cover  every  case,  but  Pliny 
has  done  entirely  right.  Christians  are  not  to  be 
hunted  up.  An  accused  person  who  will  purge  him- 
self by  acts  of  heathen  worship  is  to  be  pardoned,  as 
on  repentance,  even  though  the  judge  may  be  con- 
vinced that  he  was  a  Christian  formerly.  Christians 
who  are  openly  accused  and  convicted  must  be  pun- 
ished. That  is,  Christianity,  though  not  an  offense 
against  any  particular  law,  is  still  to  be  treated  as  a 
danger  to  Roman  policy.  But  it  need  not  be  de- 
stroyed. To  keep  it  down  is  enough.  For  the  letter 
goes  on  to  say  that  anonymous  accusations  are  not  to 
be  attended  to  at  all.  "  That  is  a  very  bad  prece- 
dent, and  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  our  age." 

"  This  Edict,"  says  the  German  writer,  Uhlhorn, 
"  has  been  regarded  by  some  as  a  sword,  and  by 
others  as  a  shield.  Really,  it  was  both."  It  is  a  for- 
cible comment  on  the  hard  case  of  the  Christians  of 
the  second  century,  that  they  seem  to  have  regarded 
Trajan,  who  thus  approved  their  slaughter,  as  a 
benevolent  protector.  Practically,  to  these  unfortu- 
nate victims  already  classed  as  outlaws,  this  order 


118  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

that  nothing  should  be  done  to  their  hurt  without  a 
prosecutor  ready  to  take  the  responsibility  of  appear- 
ing openly  against  them,  was  of  inestimable  value. 
Under  this  reign  hundreds  must  have  perished,  it 
would  seem,  in  Bithynia-Pontus,  and  holy  Ignatius 
was  thrown  to  the  beasts  at  Rome,  yet  later  in  the 
century  men  looked  back  to  it  as  to  a  time  of  im- 
perial favor.  It  is  not  to  be  set  down  as  a  mere 
blunder  of  theirs.  It  was  but  the  exaggeration  of  a 
fact.  Trajan  held  the  common  view  of  Christians, 
but  considering  what  that  view  was,  he  held  it  mer- 
cifully. 

In  the  next  reign,  that  of  Hadrian,  Christianity 
made  a  clear  step  forward.  It  began  to  speak  for 
itself.  The  date  of  this  new  beginning  is  not  with- 
out significance.  It  was  just  after  getting  its  minis- 
try settled  in  the  form  which  it  was  to  hold  without 
any  substantial  change  for  ages, — the  development 
of  the  Mediaeval  Papacy  ivas  a  substantial  change, 
but  that  cannot  fairly  be  dated  earlier  than  the  time 
of  the  "  Forged  Decretals,"  the  middle  of  the  ninth 
century, — that  the  Church  first  set  itself  to  the  great 
work  of  explaining  and  defending  itself  to  the  sur- 
rounding world.  Not  that  the  Church  was  just  now 
waking  up  to  the  idea  of  its  duty  to  convert  the 
world.  Far  from  it.  Not  only  the  spirit  of  salva- 
tion and  self-sacrifice,  which  is  the  spirit  of  every 
deeply  converted  soul,  but  the  very  spirit  of  selfish- 
ness and  self-preservation,  would  dictate  to  every 
man  who  gave  himself  to  the  Christian  Kingdom  a 
sense  of  the  necessity  of  laboring  for  the  Kingdom's 
growth.     They  that  had  embraced  the  hope  of  the 


An  Aye  of  Apologists.  119 

Gospel  were  but  a  little  handful  everywhere,  mis- 
conceived, disliked,  suspected,  threatened,  perse- 
cuted. They  must  convert  their  swarming  foes  into 
friends  and  fellow  laborers,  or  to  all  human  foresight 
they  must  perish.  That  had  been  felt,  no  doubt, 
from  the  very  first.  Whether  in  self-sacrifice,  or  in 
self-interest,  Christians  had  been  scattering  good 
seed  as  well  as  they  knew  how.  But  certainly  with 
the  completion  of  its  organization,  the  Church  began 
to  present  its  cause  before  the  world  in  a  new  way. 
It  began  to  write  books.  It  began  to  explain  and 
argue  its  case  in  a  literary  form.  Hitherto  the  mis- 
sionary work  of  the  Church  had  been  a  work  of  in- 
dividuals upon  individuals.  Now  it  began  to  be  the 
appeal  of  an  organization  to  a  community.  It  may 
be  supposed  that  the  newly  established  Diocesan 
Episcopacy  gave  the  Church  a  deeper  sense  of  its 
own  strength.  A  strong  organization  does  produce 
such  an  effect.  At  the  same  time  the  rising  strength 
of  this  strange  sect  called  "  Christians  "  had  certainly 
begun  to  make  a  serious  impression  upon  the  heathen 
world.  Christianity  was  just  grown  to  the  point  of 
putting  forward  representatives  and  champions. 
Heathenism  was  just  beginning  to  be  ready  to  listen, 
not  with  any  intellectual  respect  at  first,  but  with 
the  attention  due  to  a  movement  large  enough  to  be 
a  danger.  Hence  the  second  century  came  to  be 
preeminently  an  Age  of  Apologists,  as  the  technical 
phrase  is,  of  writers  maintaining  the  Christian  Reve- 
lation and  the  Christian  Kingdom  against  the  oppo- 
sition of  heathen  and  Jew. 

We  have  reckoned  the  transition  from  the  Apos- 


120  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tolic  to  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  as  covering  roundly 
the  years  75-125.  In  that  last  year  precisely,  it 
would  seem,  a  political  event,  a  visit  of  the  Emperor 
Hadrian  to  Athens,  called  out  the  first  two  writings 
of  this  class,  the  Apologies  of  Quadratics  and  Aristides, 
Of  Quadratus  almost  nothing  is  known.  There  was 
a  bishop  of  Athens  of  that  name  at  a  later  time,  but 
it  could  not  have  been  this  one.  Oh  the  other  hand, 
Eusebius,  who  seems  to  have  regarded  the  writing 
of  this  book  as  an  important  turning-point  in  the 
Church's  history,  for  he  finds  room  for  it  in  his  very 
meagre  Chronicle,  besides  giving  it  the  first  among 
events  of  the  reign  of  Hadrian  in  his  History,  men- 
tions Quadratus  without  any  descriptive  addition,  as 
if  he  were  either  a  man  already  introduced,  or  one  of 
whom  he  could  find  nothing  more  to  tell.  If  this  ts 
the  same  Quadratus  whom  Eusebius  has  named  be- 
fore, he  is  a  man  who  in  the  days  of  Ignatius  of 
Antioch  was  reckoned  among  the  glories  of  the 
Church  in  Asia  Minor,  being  "  renowned  along  with 
the  daughters  of  Philip1  for  prophetical  gifts."  He 
is  mentioned  in  one  place  in  Eusebius  in  connection 
with  a  prophetess,  Ammia,  who  lived  in  Philadel- 
phia, but  we  have  no  clear  indication  of  his  own 
place  of  residence.  It  would  be  pleasant  to  think 
that  just  when  the  prophetical  gift  was  beginning  to 
be  withdrawn  from  the  Church,  and  was  already 
rare,  it  was  used  in  one  of  its  last  outpourings  to 
lead  the  way  into  a  new  line  of  Christian  activity, 

1  Eusebius  has  Philip  the  Evaugelist  in  his  mind,  and  the  pas- 
sage Acts  xxi.  8.  He  seems  to  have  confounded  this  Philip,  the 
deacon,  with  Philip  the  Apostle.  The  Philip  here  named  ended 
his  days  in  Hierapolis. 


Quadratus  Historical,  not  Metaphysical.       121 

and  give  the  first  example  which  the  Christian  evi- 
dence-writers of  all  the  ages  should  follow.  Cer- 
tainly, if  our  Quadratus  was  a  man  that  lived  some- 
where in  the  neighborhood  of  Ephesus,  he  could 
easily  have  crossed  the  ^Egean  sea  to  Athens,  to  meet 
the  great  Emperor  and  present  his  appeal  to  him. 
This  is  only  a  guess,  it  may  be  said,  but  it  is  a 
highly  probable  guess,  and  rather  illuminatiug. 

Two  things  Eusebius  tells  us  distinctly,  that 
Quadratus  wrote  this  appeal  because  evil  men  were 
trying  to  raise  persecution  against  the  Christians, — 
it  was,  apparently,  a  popular,  rather  than  an  official 
movement, — and  that  he  had  been  a  hearer  of  the 
Apostles.  The  only  passage  of  his  Apology  now 
known  is  one  which  Eusebius  quotes  as  showing  how 
early  in  Christian  history  the  writer  must  have  lived. 

"  But  the  works  of  our  Saviour  were  always  pres- 
ent,1 for  they  were  genuine, — the  people  healed,  and 
the  people  raised  from  the  dead,  who  were  seen  not 
only  when  they  were  healed,  and  when  they  were 
raised,  but  were  also  always  in  evidence.  And  not 
merely  while  the  Saviour  was  on  earth,  but  also 
after  His  death,  they  were  alive  for  a  considerable 
time,  so  that  some  of  them  lived  even  to  our  day." 

Quadratus,  then,  is  the  father  of  the  historical 
method  in  Christian  Evidences.  He  appeals  to  facts 
as  witnesses  to  the  presence  of  a  power  sufficient  to 
cause  them,  and  very  probably  it  was  the  appeal  of 
the  man  of  simple  common  sense.  Aristides,  on  the 
other  hand,  was  an  Athenian  philosopher,  a  man  of 

1He  seems  to  meau  that  they  lasted,  unlike  the  tricks  of  ma- 
gicians, and  could  be  examined  long  after. 


122  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

trained  mind,  accustomed  to  metaphysical  subtleties. 
His  defense  of  Christianity  was  likely  to  take  an- 
other tarn,  commending  it  as  the  first  successful 
answer  to  the  soul's  questions  about  life.  It  is  note- 
worthy that  Eusebius,  working  with  the  historian's 
instinct  uppermost,  quotes  nothing  whatever  from 
this,  the  second  of  the  Christian  Apologists,  and  for 
centuries  it  was  supposed  that  his  book  was  utterly 
lost.  It  has  lately  been  very  fully  restored,  and  the 
story  of  its  recovery  is  one  of  the  romances  of  Chris- 
tian literature.  A  few  years  since  a  fragment  of 
an  Armenian  version  was  found  in  a  Venetian  mon- 
astery of  studious  Armenian  monks,  who  published 
a  Latin  translation  of  their  treasure  in  1878.  Eleven 
years  later  Professor  J.  Rendel  Harris  had  the  satis- 
faction of  finding  a  Syriac  version  of  the  whole 
Apology  in  that  famous  Convent  of  St.  Catharine, 
on  Mount  Sinai,  where  the  Sinaitic  Codex  of  the 
New  Testament  and  other  important  manuscripts 
have  been  brought  to  light.  Then  came  the  ro- 
mantic surprise.  It  had  long  been  known  that  in 
the  eighth  century  a  Christian  writer  had  produced 
an  extraordinary  fiction,  "  The  Story  of  Barlaam  and 
Josaphat,"  founded  on  the  traditions  that  circulated 
in  India  concerning  the  wonderful  life  of  Gautama 
Buddha.  In  the  Christian,  as  in  the  Hindu,  story  we 
have  a  king's  son  brought  up  in  great  seclusion  and 
in  great  luxury,  yet  longing  to  know  the  world  in 
which  he  lives,  and  presently  discovering  its  cruel 
misery.  In  each  story  the  young  prince  gives  up 
luxury  and  splendor  and  retires  into  a  monastic 
solitude  to  practise  ascetic  rigors.     But  with  a  holy 


Story  of  Barlaam  and  Josaphat.  123 

boldness  the  Christian  story  turns  the  founder  of 
Buddhism  into  a  Christian  convert  and  devotee, 
humbly  learning  lessons  of  true  religion  from  a 
Christian  monk,  Barlaam,  who  encounters  him  in  the 
wilderness  of  his  self-banishment.  The  king  hears 
of  his  son's  conversion,  recalls  him  to  the  court,  and 
orders  a  public  disputation  to  be  held,  to  restore  the 
wanderer  to  a  better  mind.  Barlaam  is  to  be  repre- 
sented by  a  non-Christian  substitute,  who  has  orders 
to  be  sure  to  make  a  weak  defense.  The  day  ar- 
rives, and  the  false  monk,  Nachor,  presents  an  argu- 
ment so  noble  that  king  and  court  and  people,  and 
the  unwilling  orator  himself,  are  converted  by  it  to 
the  Christian  religion. 

The  rest  of  the  story  may  be  passed  over.  Its  in- 
terest for  us  lies  in  the  fact  that  in  this  story  of 
Barlaam  and  Josaphaty  translated  into  ^Ethiopic, 
Arabic,  Hebrew,  and  Armenian  in  the  East,  and  into 
nearly  every  language  of  the  West,  and  made  even 
into  a  mediaeval  English  poem,  has  been  preserved 
through  the  centuries,  though  for  centuries  no  man 
suspected  it,  the  lost  Apology  of  Aristides  of  Athens, 
put  into  the  mouth  of  a  Hindu  sage.  The  eighth 
century  novelist  could  find  no  written  argument  for 
Christianity  which  seemed  to  him  more  worthy  to 
be  represented  as  an  utterance  dictated  by  supernat- 
ural power. 

"  I,  O  King,"  says  the  philosopher,  "  by  the  grace  of 
God  came  into  this  world,  and  when  I  had  considered 
the  heaven  and  the  earth  and  the  seas,  and  had  sur- 
veyed the  sun  and  the  rest  of  the  creation,  I  marvelled 
at  the  beauty  of  the  world.     And  I  perceived  that  the 


124  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

world  and  all  that  is  therein  are  moved  by  the  power 
of  another,  and  I  understood  that  he  who  moves 
them  is  God,  who  is  hidden  in  them  and  veiled  by 
them.  And  it  is  manifest  that  that  which  causes 
motion  is  more  powerful  than  that  which  is  moved. 
But  that  I  should  make  search  concerning  this  same 
Mover  of  all,  as  to  what  is  His  nature,  for  it  seems 
to  me,  He  is  indeed  unsearchable  in  His  nature,  and 
that  I  should  argue  as  to  the  constancy  of  His  gov- 
ernment, so  as  to  grasp  it  fully, — this  is  a  vain  effort 
for  me ;  for  it  is  not  possible  that  a  man  should  fully 
comprehend  it.  I  say,  however,  concerning  this 
Mover  of  the  world,  that  He  is  God  of  all,  who 
made  all  things  for  the  sake  of  mankind.  And  it 
seems  to  me  that  this  is  reasonable,  that  one  should 
fear  God,  and  should  not  oppress  man. 

"  I  sky,  then,  that  God  is  not  born,  not  made,  an 
ever-abiding  Nature,  without  beginning  and  without 
end,  immortal,  perfect,  and  incomprehensible.  Now 
when  I  say  that  He  is  perfect,  this  means  that  there 
is  not  in  Him  any  defect,  and  that  He  is  not  in  need 
of  anything,  but  all  things  are  in  need  of  Him. 
And  when  I  say  that  He  is  without  beginning,  this 
means  that  everything  which  has  beginning  has  also 
an  end,  and  that  which  has  an  end  may  be  brought 
to  an  end.  He  has  no  name,  for  everything  which 
has  a  name  is  kindred  to  things  created.  Form  He 
has  none,  nor  yet  any  union  of  members,  for  whatso- 
ever possesses  these  is  kindred  to  things  fashioned. 
He  is  neither  male  nor  female.  The  heavens  do  not 
limit  Him,  but  the  heavens  and  all  things,  visible 
and  invisible,  receive  their  bounds  from  Him.     Ad- 


Aristides  not  in  Bondage  to  the  Letter.       125 

versaiy  He  lias  none,  for  there  exists  notary  stronger 
than  He.  Wrath  and  indignation  He  possesses  not, 
fur  there  is  nothing  which  is  able  to  stand  against 
Him.  Ignorance  and  forgetfulness  are  not  in  His 
nature,  for  He  is  altogether  wisdom  and  understand- 
ing, and  in  Him  stands  fast  all  that  exists.  He  re- 
quires not  sacrifice  and  libation,  nor  any  single  thing 
that  is  seen.  He  requires  not  aught  from  any,  but 
all  living  creatures  stand  in  need  of  Him." 

This  is  a  fine  beginning,  notably  fine  in  its  freedom 
from  the  bondage  of  the  letter  of  the  religion  which 
it  defends.  It  says  that  God  has  no  name,  though 
He  has  condescended  to  name  Himself  as  Jehovah, 
and  even  to  wear  the  lowlier  name  of  Jesus.  It 
says  that  God  has  no  indignation,  no  wrath,  when 
God's  own  Word  many  times  ascribesjooth  to  Him. 
It  says  that  God  requires  no  sacrifice,  nor  any  visible 
tiling,  when  eveiy  Christian  held  himself  under  a 
strict  law  to  pay  to  God  a  visible  worship,  and  in 
particular  to  offer  to  Him  something  which  every 
Christian  called  a  "  sacrifice "  on  the  first  day  of 
every  recurring  week.  Yet  in  every  case  what 
Aristides  meant  was  true,  and  his  manly  recognition 
that  human  words  must  be  used  with  a  breadth  that 
will  look  like  inconsistency,  in  order  to  cover  the 
truth  of  a  great  universe  and  an  infinite  God,  is 
really  splendid.  Only  such  broad  denials  must  be 
read  with  care,  so  that  we  shall  not  bring  Aristides 
as  a  witness  to  prove  that  some  Christians  did  not 
believe  this  or  that,  which  no  Christian  of  those  days 
ever  thought  of  denying. 

The  Apology  goes  on  to  divide  the  world's  popula- 


126      .  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tion  into  four  groups, — Barbarians,  Greeks,  Jews,  and 
Christians,  "Barbarians''  and  "Greeks  "  being  evi- 
dently a  Greek  writer's  technical  terms  for  people  out- 
side of  the  Roman  Empire,  and  people  inside  of  that 
great  organism,  respectively.  The  religious  ideas  of 
each  of  these  four  classes  are  examined.  The  bar- 
barian notions  of  gods  many  and  lords  many  are 
shown  to  be  shamefully  foolish,  and  the  Greek  no- 
tions shamefully  immoral.  The  gods  and  goddesses 
of  the  Greek  and  Roman  mythology  had  every  kind 
of  vice  and  crime  ascribed  to  them,  and  Aristides 
breaks  out  in  a  fine  piece  of  declamation, — "  For  be- 
hold !  when  the  Greeks  made  laws,  they  did  not  per- 
ceive that  by  their  laws  they  condemn  their  gods. 
For  if  their  laws  are  righteous,  their  gods  are  un- 
righteous." The  Jews  are  taken  up  in  turn,  and  a 
little  unfairly  dealt  with.  Evidently  the  bitterness 
toward  them  as  dangerous  stirrers  up  of  persecution 
had  made  it  impossible  for  the  philosopher  to  be 
perfectly  philosophical.  Then  comes  the  positive 
statement  of  what  Christians  are  like.  There  is  but 
little  about  their  doctrine.  That  was  a  pearl  not  to 
be  cast  before  a  heathen  hearer,  who  might  be  swinish 
in  his  treatment  of  it.  But  from  the  glowing  ac- 
count of  what  Christians  were  in  life,  it  is  worth 
while  to  read  this  extract: 

"  They  know  and  trust  in  God,  the  Creator  of 
heaven  and  earth,  in  whom  and  from  whom  are  all 
things,  to  whom  there  is  no  other  god  as  companion, 
from  whom  they  received  commandments  which  they 
engraved  upon  their  minds,  and  observe  in  hope  and 
expectation  of  the  world  which  is  to  come.     Where- 


The   Character  of  Christians.  127 

fore  they  do  not  commit  adultery,  nor  fornication, 
nor  bear  false  witness,  nor  embezzle  what  is  held  in 
pledge,  nor  covet  what  is  not  theirs.  They  honor 
father  and  mother,  and  show  kindness  to  those  near 
to  them,  and  whenever  they  are  judges,  they  judge 
uprightly.  They  do  not  worship  idols  made  in  the 
image  of  man,  and  whatsoever  they  would  not  that 
others  should  do  unto  them,  they  do  not  to  others, 
and  of  the  food  which  is  consecrated  to  idols  they  do 
not  eat,  for  they  are  pure.  And  their  oppressors 
they  treat  with  kindness,  and  make  them  their 
friends ;  they  do  good  to  their  enemies.  And  their 
women,  O  King,  are  pure  as  virgins,  and  their 
daughters  are  modest.  And  their  men  keep  them- 
selves from  every  unlawful  union  and  from  all  un- 
cleanness,  in  the  hope  of  a  recompense  toxome  in 
the  other  world.  Further,  if  one  or  other  of  them 
have  bondmen  and  bondwomen  or  children,  through 
love  toward  them  they  persuade  them  to  become 
Christians,  and  when  they  have^  done  so,  they  call 
them  brethren  without  distinction.  They  do  not 
worship  strange  gods,  and  they  go  their  way  in  all 
modesty  and  cheerfulness.  Falsehood  is  not  found 
among  them,  and  they  love  one  another,  and  from 
widows  they  do  not  turn  away  their  esteem,  and  they 
deliver  the  orphan  from  him  who  treats  him  harshly. 
And  he  who  has  gives  to  him  who  has  not  without 
boasting. l     And  when  they  see  a  stranger,  the}*-  take 

1  Compare  the  following  from  the  next  chapter  of  the  Apology : 
"And  they  do  not  proclaim  in  the  ears  of  the  multitude  the  kind 
deeds  they  do,  but  are  careful  that  no  one  should  notice  them ; 
and  they  conceal  their  giving  just  like  one  who  finds  a  treasure 
and  conceals  it."     Church  fairs  were  not  then  invented  ! 


128  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

him  into  their  homes,  and  rejoice  over  him  as  a  very 
brother;  for  they  do  not  call  them  brethren  after  the 
flesh,  but  brethren  after  the  spirit  and  in  God.  And 
whenever  one  of  their  poor  passes  from  the  world, 
each  one  of  them,  according  to  his  ability,  gives  heed 
to  him,  and  carefully  sees  to  his  burial.  And  if  they 
hear  that  one  of  their  number  is  imprisoned,  or  af- 
flicted, on  account  of  the  name  of  their  Messiah,  all 
of  them  anxiously  minister  to  his  necessity,  and  if  it 
is  possible  to  redeem  him,  they  set  him  free.  And  if 
there  is  among  them  any  that  is  poor  and  needy,  and 
they  have  no  spare  food,  they  fast  two  or  three  days, 
in  order  to  supply  to  the  needy  their  lack  of  food. 
They  observe  the  precepts  of  their  Messiah  with 
much  care,  living  justly  and  soberly,  as  the  Lord 
their  God  commanded  them.  Every  morning  and 
every  hour,  they  give  thanks  and  praise  to  God  for 
His  loving  kindnesses  toward  them,  and  for  their  food 
and  for  their  drink  they  offer  thanksgiving  to  Him. 
And  if  any  righteous  man  among  them  passes  from 
the  world,  they  rejoice  and  offer  thanks  to  God,  and 
they  escort  his  body  as  if  he  were  setting  out  from 
one  place  to  another  near.  And  when  a  child  has 
been  born  to  one  of  them,  they  give  thanks  to  God, 
and  if,  furthermore,  it  happen  to  die  in  childhood, 
they  give  thanks  to  God  the  more,  as  for  one  who 
has  passed  through  the  world  without  sins.  And 
further,  if  they  see  that  any  one  of  them  dies  in  his 
ungodliness,  or  in  his  sins,  for  him  they  grieve  bit- 
terly, and  sorrow  as  for  one  who  goes  to  meet  his 
doom." 

Excellently  said,  and  the  facts  were  better  than 


The  Rescript  of  Hadrian.  129 

the* words.  Bat  neither  the  appeal  of  plain  common 
sense  to  the  testimony  of  the  people  that  had  had^ 
personal  experience  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ, 
nor  yet  the  appeal  of  the  philosopher  to  the  better 
instincts  of  humanity,  accomplished  any  considerable 
result.  In  matters  touching  religion,  even  more  than' 
in  others,  reason  contending  with  prejudice  always 
loses  the  first  battle,  and  the  second,  and  the  third. 
It  must  go  to  Valley  Forge  before  it  can  open  the 
road  to  Yorktown.  A  rescript  sent  by  Hadrian  to 
the  Proconsul  Minucius  Fundanus,  governor  of  the 
Roman  province  of  Asia  (the  western  strip,  it  may 
be  remembered,  of  what  we  call  Asia  Minor),  seems 
to  be  the  measure  of  the  effect  produced  on  the  Em- 
peror's mind  by  appeals  in  behalf  of  his  Christian 
subjects.  The  genuineness  of  this  rescript  has  been 
much  questioned,  but  it  is  defended  most  confidently 
by  such  scholars  as  Lightfoot  and  Mommsen,  and 
they  seem  to  have  proved  their  case.  The  imperial 
letter  runs  thus : 

"  I  have  received  the  letter  sent  me  by  your  dis- 
tinguished predecessor,  Serenus  ]  Granianus,  and  I 
am  unwilling  to  pass  over  his  report  without  reply, 
for  fear  that  innocent  persons  may  be  subjected  to 
attack,  and  opportunity  given  to  false  accusers  to 
despoil  them.  If  therefore,  the  people  of  your  prov- 
ince are  plainly  anxious  to  support  these  complaints 
of  theirs  against  the  Christians  by  presenting  formal 
charges  against  them  on  any  point  before  your  judg- 
ment seat,  do  not  forbid  them  to  pursue  this  course. 
But  I  will  not  allow  them  in  this  matter  to  resort  to 

1  The  name  is  so  given  iu  our  copies.     It  should  he  Silvanus, 
I 


130  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

mere  passionate  appeals  and  outcries.  For  it  is  far 
more  just,  that  if  any  person  is  ready  to  file  an  in- 
dictment, you  give  a  formal  hearing. 

"  Accordingly,  if  any  person  files  an  indictment,  and 
proves  that  the  people  above-mentioned  are  commit 
ting  any  violation  of  law,  you  are  to  decree  penalties 
in  proportion  to  the  deserts  of  the  offenders.  But 
the  point  you  are  to  give  most  especial  heed  to  is,  if 
any  person  wittingly  prefers  false  charges  against 
any  one  of  these  people,  to  punish  the  accuser  more 
severely  in  consideration  of  his  flagrant  wickedness." 

Plainly  there  had  been  a  popular  movement 
against  Christians  in  the  province  of  Asia,  and  an 
attempt  to  make  Trajan's  rule  of  procedure  mean 
that  any  person,  or  a  promiscuous  crowd,  might 
charge  a  man  with  being  a  Christian,  and  leave  it  to 
the  court  to  apply  tests  and  find  out  whether  it  was 
true.  Hadrian  seems  to  have  made  one  advance 
upon  Trajan's  policy.  The  court  is  not  called  upon 
to  make  a  Christian  testify  against  himself.  There 
must  be  an  accuser  armed  with  proofs  of  some 
offense  against  the  law,  and  if  he  fails  in  his  at- 
tempted proof,  he  is  liable  to  severe  punishment  for 
attempted  defamation  of  character.  But  does  Ha- 
drian mean  to  affirm,  or  to  reverse,  his  predecessor's 
distinct  affirmation  that  a  man  must  be  punished  as 
an  evil  doer,  if  proved  to  be  a  Christian?  That  we 
cannot  tell.  Apparently,  he  was  intentionally  am- 
biguous. He  said  that  an  offense  against  the  law 
must  be  proved.  There  was  technically  no  law 
against  a  man's  being  a  Christian.  Yet  to  refuse  to 
worship  the  Emperor's  image  was  constructive  trea- 


Severity  of  the  Antonines.  131 

son,  and  a  Christian  would  refuse  to  pay  such  wor- 
ship, if  tried.  It  seems  as  if  Hadrian,  somewhat 
more  even  than  Trajan,  discouraged  habitual  perse- 
cution, and  yet  no  Christian's  life  was  safe  before  a 
judge  with  a  personal  leaning  to  severity.  However 
much  certain  later  traditions  which  ascribe  many 
martyrdoms  to  this  reign  may  be  discounted,  it  is 
certain  that  just  in  its  last  years,  at  Rome  itself,  the 
imperial  city,  the  bishop  of  that  Church,  Teles- 
phorus,  suffered  for  Christ's  sake,  and  sealed  the 
glorious  promise  of  his  name. ! 

The  reigns  of.  Antoninus  Pius  (138-161)  and 
Marcus  Aurelius  (161-180)  seem  to  have  been 
marked  by  a  deepening  severity  against  the  Chris- 
tian name.  Both  were  exceptionally  worthy  men, 
Marcus  especially  being  one  of  the  noblest  Romans 
in  the  whole  history  of  the  decaying  empire  ;  but 
just  because  they  took  life  with  a  conscientious 
seriousness,  they  were  less  tolerant  than  a  man  of 
"  practical  politics,"  like  Trajan,  or  a  frivolous  scep- 
tic, like  Hadrian.  It  is  true  that  Antoninus  wrote 
letters  to  certain  "  Greek  cities,"— the  expression  is 
probably  to  be  taken  as  including  Smyrna  and  other 
leading  cities  of  Asia  Minor,  which  prided  them- 
selves on  their  Greek  origin, — to  prohibit  sharply 
any  "  revolutionary  proceedings  "  against  the  Chris- 
tians, that  is,  popular  uprisings  not  following  the  es- 
tablished forms  of  law  ;  but  it  is  abundantly  clear 
that  in  his  time  the  mere  fact  of  being  shown  to  be 
a  Christian  was  quite  enough  to  condemn  a  man  to 

1  Teksphorus  means  in  Greek  "one  that  brings  his  work  to  a  full 
end,"  "one  that  brings  fruit  to  perfection." 


132  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

death,  and  in  the  days  of  the  high-minded  philoso- 
pher, Marcus,  every  feature  of  protection  was  taken 
away,  Christians  were  carefully  sought  out  for  pun- 
ishment, rewards  were  given  to  informers  against 
them,  and  the  only  restraint  upon  persecution  was 
that  it  must  be  a  matter  of  legal  procedure,  and  not 
of  mob  rule. 

The  martyrdom  of  Publius,  a  bishop  of  Athens, 
belongs  probably  to  the  reign  of  Antoninus,  and  is 
likely  to  have  been  the  outcome  of  one  of  those  very 
commotions  which  drew  out  his  rescript  addressed 
to  the  Greek  cities.  A  more  conspicuous  example 
of  this  government  by  popular  clamor  is  found  in 
the  martyrdom  of  St.  Polycarp,  Bishop  of  Smyrna. 

We  have  seen  this  bishop  before,  entertaining  the 
prisoner,  Ignatius,  on  his  road  to  martyrdom,  receiv- 
ing later  a  letter  from  him,  and  writing  himself  to 
the  Church  at  Philippi.  The  friend  of  Ignatius,  the 
pupil  of  St.  John,  the  teacher  in  turn  of  the  great 
teacher,  Irenseus,  who  a  generation  later  was  a  chief 
defender  of  the  Church's  faith  as  a  secure  tradition 
from  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  Polycarp  is  the 
most  important  figure  in  Christian  history  in  this 
middle  portion  of  the  second  century,  and  one  of 
the  most  important  in  Christian  history  generally. 
It  is  not  departing  far  from  the  subject  of  the 
Church's  persecutions  and  the  Church's  self-defense, 
to  point  out  how  this  heroic  figure  stands  for  the 
security  of  our  faith  in  that  Christian  faith  for 
which  he  died.  His  pupil,  Irenseus,  records  that  he 
was  made  Bishop  of  Smyrna  "by  the  Apostles." 
The  plural  number  is  hardly  to  be  pressed,  but  the 


The  Faith  not   Changed  in   Transmission.     133 

meaning  certainly  includes  St.  John,  whose  pupil 
Polycarp  is  expressly  declared  to  have  been.1  Poly- 
carp,  then,  not  only  received  from  St.  John,  the 
Apostle,  the  Gospel  as  St.  John  received  and  under- 
stood and  preached  it,  but  was  himself  a  specially 
trusted  representative  of  St.  John  in  the  carrying  on 
of  that  Gospel  into  the  second  century.  Of  Poly- 
carp, in  turn,  we  have  in  Irenaeus  not  only  a  pupil, 
but  a  devoted  friend  and  follower,  and  it  is  Irenaeus 
who  more  than  any  other  man  stands  forward  as  the 
spokesman  of  the  Church  against  the  forces  of  heresy 
and  division  in  the  closing  years  of  that  same  second 
century,  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  Sav- 
iour's death  and  the  consequent  birth  of  the  Chris- 
tian Kingdom.  It  is  claimed  sometimes,  by  people 
not  very  familiar  with  the  facts,  that  in  some  obscure 
passageway  in  the  course  of  time  the  pure  Gospel  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  corrupted  into  a  sacramental, 
sacerdotal  ecclesiasticism,  of  the  earth,  earthy.  The 
only  possible  place  to  which  such  a  revolution  may 
be  assigned  is  covered  by  the  testimony  of  Polycarp, 
and  of  Polycarp's  greatest  pupil,  that  their  Gospel 

1  There  is  not  a  little  reason  for  thinking  that  Polycarp  was  the 
"angel  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna,"  to  whom  that  great  message 
was  sent,  "Be  thou  faithful  unto  death,  and  I  will  give  thee  a 
crown  of  life  "  (Rev.  ii.  10).  If  that  message,  curiously  inappro- 
priate, by  the  way,  for  an  angel  of  the  heavenly  and  deathless 
order, — was  really  sent,  as  Irenaeus  expressly  says  that  it  was, 
"  in  the  time  of  Domitian," — and  how  could  Irenaeus  have  failed 
to  get  information  on  such  a  point  from  Polycarp  and  get  it  right? 
— then  it  is  possible,  indeed,  that  the  chief  leader  of  the  Church 
of  Smyrna  suffered  in  that  very  "  tribulation  "  which  was  then 
impendiug,  and  that  Polycarp  succeeded  him.  But  "  faithful 
unto  death  "  gathers  force  wonderfully  if  regarded  as  a  prophetic 
message  to  one  who  was  to  be  exposed  to  danger  and  difficulty  for 
nearly  sixty  years  more. 


134  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

was  the  Gospel  of  the  first  Apostles,  and  that  was  the 
one  reason  why  they  could  feel  sure  that  it  was  sure. 
For  us  the  importance  of  Polycarp  in  history  is  that 
he  is  our  chief,  conspicuous  witness  at  the  most  criti- 
cal juncture,  that  the  Gospel  of  the  Catholic  Church 
is  the  Gospel  of  her  Lord  and  Saviour.  But  we 
must  return  to  the  martyrdom. 

The  "  General  Assembly  of  Asia  "  (in  Latin,  Com- 
mune Asice)  was  a  body  of  representatives  of  the 
principal  cities  of  that  province,  which  met  once  a 
year  from  city  to  city  to  attend  to  certain  responsi- 
bilities of  local  self-government,  and  held  once  in 
four  years  solemn  religious  exercises  in  futherance 
of  the  new  cultus,  in  which  Asia  Minor  seems  to 
have  been  in  every  way  first,  the  worship  of  the 
Emperor.  The  chief  priest  of  these  rites  was  called 
the  Asiarch,  and  as  we  know  that  in  February,  A. 
D.  155,  the  Asiarch  of  that  time,  Philip  of  Tralles, 
was  giving  a  public  exhibition  of  games  and  wild 
beast  shows  at  Smyrna,  it  seems  likely  that  this 
assembly  was  then  in  a  quadriennial  session.  We 
can  imagine  that  the  spirit  of  loyalty  to  Roman  in- 
stitutions and  of  hatred  to  the  Christians  as  supposed 
to  be  disloyal,  was  at  fever  heat.  The  Proconsul, 
Statius  Quadratus,  the  Roman  governor  of  the  prov- 
ince, was  present,  but  apparent^  as  a  guest  onl}r, 
and  not  to  hold  court  in  any  regular  fashion.  Eleven 
Christians  already  condemned  to  death  from  the 
neighboring  city  of  Philadelphia  suffered  by  torture 
and  by  exposure  to  wild  beasts.  "  When  they  were 
so  torn  by  lashes  that  the  mechanism  of  their  flesh 
was  revealed,  even  as  far  as  the  veins  and  arteries," 


Let  Search  be  Made  for  Poly  carp  !  135 

— so  says  the  letter  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna  to  the 
Church  of  Philomelium,  to  which  we  owe  this  story 
of  Polycarp's  good  end, — "  they  endured  patiently, 
so  that  the  very  bystanders  had  pity  and  wept ;  while 
they  themselves  reached  such  a  pitch  of  bravery 
that  none  of  them  uttered  a  cry  or  a  groan,  thus 
showing  to  us  all  that  at  that  hour  the  martyrs  of 
Christ,  being  tortured,  were  absent  from  the  flesh,  or 
rather  that  the  Lord  was  standing  by  and  conversing 
with  them.  And  giving  heed  unto  the  grace  of 
Christ,  they  despised  the  tortures  of  this  world, 
purchasing  at  the  cost  of  one  hour  a  release  from 
eternal  punishment."  On  the  other  hand,  a  self- 
confident  soul  who  had  persuaded  himself  and  some 
others  to  seek  death  by  self-denunciation,  was  so 
terrified  at  the  sight  of  the  wild  beasts  that  he  was 
persuaded  to  swear  the  heathen  oath  and  offer  the 
heathen  sacrifice  demanded  of  him.  "  For  this  cause, 
therefore,  brethren,"  says  the  letter,  with  a  noble 
self-restraint,  "we  praise  not  those  who  deliver 
themselves  up,  for  the  Gospel  doth  not  so  teach  us." 
From  the  throng  that  filled  the  amphitheatre, 
whether  maddened  by  the  constancy  of  some,  or 
made  hopeful  by  the  weakness  of  others,  we  cannot 
say,  there  arose  a  great  outcry, — "  Away  with  the 
atheists  !  Let  search  be  made  for  Polycarp  ! "  "  The 
marvellous  Polycarp,"  as  the  letter  calls  him,  had 
had  warning  that  his  life  was  threatened,  and  he  had 
wished  to  face  the  danger,  but  his  friends  had 
begged  him  to  leave  the  city.  He  withdrew  to  a 
neighboring  farm  with  a  few  companions  and  spent 
all  his  time  in  prayer,  "praying  for  all  men  and  for 


136  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

all  the  Churches  throughout  the  world ;  for  this  was 
his  constant  habit."  Three  days  before  his  arrest,  he 
fell  into  a  trance  and  saw  his  pillow  burning.  From 
that  time  he  was  sure  that  he  was  to  be  burned  alive. 
A  force  of  police  and  soldiers  was  sent  after  him. 
He  had  escaped  to  another  farm,  but  two  of  his 
slaves  were  arrested  and  put  to  torture, — slavery  was 
not  going  to  be  felt  by  any  Christians  to  be  unchris- 
tian for  some  centuries  yet, — and  one  betrayed  his 
master.  The  letter  begins  to  dwell  on  points  of 
likeness  to  another  death.  "  It  was  impossible  that 
he  should  be  hid,"  it  says,  "when  they  that  betrayed 
him  were  of  his  oion  household" — a  reminiscence 
of  St.  Matt.  x.  36.  He  could  have  escaped  once 
more,  but  he  would  not.  He  was  sure  that  the  final 
end  must  be.  "  Let  the  will  of  God  be  done,"  he 
said.  When  he  heard  that  his  pursuers  were  come, 
he  came  down  from  his  room  and  talked  with  them, 
and  men  wondered  at  his  age  and  his  firmness.  The 
old  man  ordered  a  table  to  be  spread  for  his  captors, 
— probably  they  had  had  a  long  night  ride,  and  were 
tired  and  hungry, — and  asked  one  favor  on  their 
part,  an  hour  in  which  to  pray.  "  On  their  consent- 
ing, he  stood  up  and  prayed,  being  so  full  of  the 
grace  of  God  that  for  two  hours  he  could  not  hold 
his  peace,  and  those  that  heard  were  amazed,  and 
many  repented  that  they  had  come  against  such  a 
venerable  old  man."  It  is  noted  that  his  prayer  was 
not  all  for  himself.  All  that  we  are  told  of  it,  in- 
deed, is  that  he  remembered  "  all  who  at  any  time 
had  come  in  his  way,  small  and  great,  high  and  low, 
and    the    whole    Catholic    Church    throughout    the 


Points  of  Likeness  to  the  Lord's  Death.      187 

world.  Then  he  was  ready  to  depart.  They  had 
come  out  against  him  as  against  a  robber,  it  is  noted, 
and  now  they  set  him  on  an  ass  to  go  to  his  triumph. 
It  was  noted  further,  with  a  grim  satisfaction,  that 
the  high  sheriff  was  Herod,  and  Christians  said  one 
to  another  that  the  betrayer  would  suffer  the  punish- 
ment of  Judas. 

As  the  little  procession  was  going  toward  the  city, 
the  Irenarch,  Herod,  whose  title  Lightfoot  tries  to 
render  by  the  two  suggestions  of  "  Chief  of  Police  " 
and  "  High  Sheriff,"  came  out  to  meet  them,  with  his 
father,  Nicetes,  riding  in  a  stately  carriage.  Nicetes 
and  Herod  are  described  as  *'  father  and  brother  of 
Alee,"  evidently  a  woman  well  known  in  Christian 
circles.  Is  she  the  same  Alee  to  whom  Ignatius  had 
sent  a  special  greeting  some  forty  years  before  ? 
Certainly  the  father  of  a  woman  who  had  had  such 
prominence  so  long  before,  must  have  been  a  very 
aged  man,  one  of  the  very  few  who  could  appeal  to 
Polycarp  by  that  power  of  a  common  memory  of 
early  days  which  is  so  great  a  power  with  the  very 
old.  Well,  they  took  the  old  bishop  into  their 
chariot  and  were  kind  to  him,  and  begged  him  to  be 
reasonable,  and  say  that  "  Caesar  is  Lord,"  and  some 
other  little  innocent  concessions.  At  first  he  would 
not  answer.  Then  he  said,  "  I  will  not  do  what  you 
advise  me,"  and  they  were  so  angry  that  they  turned 
him  out  of  their  coach  in  rude  haste,  and  made  him 
bruise  his  shin  in  getting  down.  So  he  went  on  to 
the  stadium. 

When  he  entered  there,  the  noise  was  so  great 
that  it  was  hard  to  distinguish  anything,  but  many 


138  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Christians  heard  a  great  voice  saying,  "  Be  strong, 
Poly  carp,  and  play  the  man."  It  was  set  down 
as  a  voice  from  heaven.  More  probably  it  was 
the  utterance  of  some  zealous  Christian  in  the  upper 
seats  among  the  poor,  where  the  disposition  to  help 
the  police  is  not  apt  to  be  the  greatest.  It  may  be 
said  without  irreverence  that  Polycarp  needed  no 
heavenly  voice  to  raise  his  courage,  that  he  had  not 
heard  already  long  before.  The  Proconsul  tried  to 
get  him  to  save  himself.  "  Swear  by  the  Genius  of 
Caesar,"  he  said ;  "  Repent,  and  say,  4  Away  with  the 
atheists  ! '  "  But  Polycarp  would  make  no  more  an- 
swer than  to  wave  his  hand  toward  the  throng  of 
lawless  heathen  in  the  stadium,  and  say  solemnly, 
"  Away  with  the  atheists."  "  Swear  the  oath,  and  I 
will  release  thee ;  revile  the  Christ,"  urged  the 
magistrate.  "  Eighty  and  six  years  have  I  been  His 
servant,"  was  the  answer,  "  and  He  hath  done  me  no 
wrong.  How  then  can  I  blaspheme  my  King  who 
saved  me  ?  "  l  This  course  of  fruitless  persuasion  and 
firm  refusal  seems  to  have  gone  on  some  time  before 
the  Proconsul  would  acknowledge  himself  beaten  by 
his  prisoner's  obstinacy.     Then  a  herald  made  pro- 

1  How  old  was  Polycarp?  His  "eighty  and  six  years  "  must 
be  reckoned  from  his  conscious  acceptance  of  the  yoke  of  Christ's 
service,  or  (possibly)  from  his  baptism  in  infant  years.  No 
Christian  of  the  second  century  would  have  thought  of  reckoning 
his  service  of  Christ  from  his  natural  birth.  His  age,  then,  may 
have  been  a  little  over  eighty-six,  or  about  a  hundred.  In  favor 
of  the  lesser  age,  Lightfoot  argues  that  Polycarp  was  not  too  old 
to  make  a  journey  to  Rome  the  year  before.  In  favor  of  the  other 
view  is  the  fact  that  his  age  is  referred  to  as  something  amazing, 
and  perhaps  a  greater  naturalness  in  the  use  of  words.  "I  have 
served"  seems  more  likely  to  mean  "I  have  consciously  given 
myself  to  serving."  In  that  case  Polycarp's  birth  must  be  dated 
about  A.  D.  55,  or  not  later  than  60. 


The  Death  of  St.  Polycarp.  130 

clamation  through   the  stadium  thrice, — "  Polycarp 
hath  confessed  himself  to  be  a  Christian !  " 

At  this  the  multitude  raised  a  great  cry,  "  This  is 
the  teacher  of  Asia,  the  father  of  the  Christians, 
the  puller  down  of  our  gods,  who  teacheth  numbers 
not  to  sacrifice  nor  worship,"  and  "with  ungovern- 
able anger "  they  demanded  that  he  be  thrown  to 
the  lions.  The  Asiarch  protested  that  he  could  not 
give  the  order :  the  games  were  officially  closed. 
Forthwith  the  multitude  demanded  that  the  martyr 
be  burned  alive.  Jews,  the  most  bitter  of  all  Chris- 
tian-haters, abounded  in  Smyrna.  Under  their 
leadership  crowds  of  people  from  the  audience  rushed 
out  to  gather  from  baths  and  workshops  stores  of 
wood  to  make  the  funeral  pile.  The  aged  bishop 
removed  his  outer  garments  and  stooped  to  take  off 
his  shoes,  but  it  was  hard  work.  He  had  not  had  to 
do  such  a  thing  for  years,  so  tenderly  had  he  been 
cared  for.  Even  before  he  was  old,  the  faithful  had  vied 
with  one  another,  who  should  be  first  to  touch  him, 
so  great  had  been  his  reputation  for  holiness.  Men 
came  to  nail  him  to  the  stake,  but  he  begged  them 
not.  The  Lord  would  give  him  power  to  stand  firm 
without  such  mean  security.  They  tied  him,  there- 
fore, and  then,  when  he  had  prayed  and  given  thanks 
for  the  privilege  of  martyrdom,  they  set  the  fire.  It 
was  not  God's  will  that  this  should  be  the  manner 
of  his  dying.  A  breeze  drove  the  flames  from  him, 
causing  them  to  eddy  round  him  like  a  bellying  sail. 
The  spectacle  proved  disappointing,  and  the  execu- 
tioner was  ordered  to  go  up  and  stab  the  saint  with 
a  dagger.     It  was  done,  and  the  Christians   noted 


140  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

with  triumph  that  the  pouring  stream  of  the  martyr's 
blood  extinguished  the  flame  that  had  been  kindled 
for  him. 

There  remained  one  more  trial  of  Christian  feeling. 
The  same  Nicetes  whom  we  have  seen  endeavoring 
to  persuade  Polycarp  to  apostatize,  was  now  put  for- 
ward by  the  Jews  to  beg  that  the  body  might  not  be 
given  to  Christian  keeping,  "  lest  they  should  aban- 
don the  Crucified  One,  and  begin  to  worship  this 
man."  "  Not  knowing,"  says  the  letter  of  the  Church 
of  Smyrna,  "  Not  knowing  that  it  will  be  impossible 
for  us  either  to  forsake  at  any  time  the  Christ  who 
suffered  for  the  salvation  of  the  whole  world  of  those 
that  are  saved, — suffered,  though  faultless,  for  sin- 
ners,— nor  to  worship  any  other.  For  Him,  being 
the  Son  of  God,  we  adore,  but  the  martyrs,  as  disci- 
ples and  imitators  of  the  Lord,  we  cherish  (as  they 
deserve)  for  their  matchless  affection  toward  their 
own  King  and  Teacher.  May  it  be  our  lot  also  to  be 
found  partakers  and  fellow  disciples  with  them  !  " 
So  the  body  was  burned,  and  only  after  that  were  the 
Christians  permitted  to  gather  up  the  bones  "  more 
valuable  than  precious  stones  and  finer  than  refined 
gold,"  and  lay  them  in  a  suitable  place,  where  they 
promised  themselves  that  they  would  come  together 
once  a  year,  "in  gladness  and  joy,  and  to  celebrate 
the  birthday  " — so  they  called  it — "  of  his  martyr- 
dom." 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  EMPIRE  :  II.  PERSECUTIONS 
AND  APOLOGISTS,  FROM  THE  DEATH  OF  ST.  POLY- 
CARP  TO  THE  ACCESSION  OF  COMMODUS. 

UCH  a  death  asPolycarp's,  and  the  deaths 
of  those  eleven  sufferers  who  had  just 
preceded  him  in  the  same  arena,  consti- 
tuted a  powerful  Apologia  for  the  Chris- 
tian cause.  "I  myself,  too,"  said  the 
greatest  Christian  thinker  of  those  days,  describing 
the  period  before  his  conversion, — "  I  myself,  too, 
when  I  was  delighting  in  the  doctrines  of  Plato,  and 
heard  the  Christians  slandered,  and  saw  them  fear- 
less of  death,  and  of  all  other  things  which  are 
counted  fearful,  perceived  that  it  was  impossible 
that  they  could  be  living  in  wicked  self-indulgence  " 
(Justin  Martyr  Second  Apology  xii.).  Thus  the 
martyrs  raised  up  apologists  in  turn,  and  these  with 
pen  more  mighty  than  the  persecutor's  sword  urged 
on  the  work  of  conviction  of  the  truth.  The  chief 
representative  of  the  apologist  by  argument  is  the 
writer  whom  we  have  just  quoted,  Justin,  the  philos- 
opher, who  also  sealed  his  testimony  with  his  blood, 
and  has  been  known  in  all  ages  since  as  Justin  Martyr. 
He  is  thus  the  only  one  of  all  the  old-time  sufferers 
who  never  appears  without  his  crown.  The  honor 
is  well  deserved. 

It  is  an  interesting  fact  about  this  eminent  de- 


142  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

fender  of  the  faith  that  he  was  "  a  good  Samaritan." 
Born  at  Flavia  Neapolis,  a  new  town  built  up  near 
the  ruins  of  the  ancient  Shechem  and  named  for  the 
Emperor  Vespasian  {Flavins  Vespasianus),  who  set- 
tled a  colony  of  his  old  soldiers  there  after  the  Jew- 
ish war,  Justin  speaks  of  "  my  race,  the  Samari- 
tans," in  a  way  that  certainly  seems  to  identify  him 
with  that  strange  race  as  one  of  their  blood.  Yet 
his  grandfather's  name,  Bacchius,  is  Greek,  his  fath- 
er's, Priscus,  is  Latin,  as  is  his  own,  and  his  education 
would  seem  to  have  been  wholly  Grecian  and  un- 
mixedly  heathen  as  well.  We  may  guess  that  the 
grandfather  was  a  soldier  of  Vespasian,  that  he 
married  a  woman  of  Samaritan  family,  and  that  he 
named  his  son  for  some  Roman  officer  under  whom 
he  had  served,  and  brought  him  up  to  be  as 
much  like  a  Roman  as  he  could.  Then  if  this  son 
married  a  wife  who  represented  Greek  or  Roman 
traditions,  the  young  Justin  would  receive  no  edu- 
cational influences  from  his  Samaritan  ancestry,  and 
would  never  feel  interested  in  it  till  he  had  become 
a  convert  to  Christianity  and  a  student  of  the  Old 
Testament.  Intellectually  ambitious,  and,  it  would 
seem,  sufficiently  well  off  to  give  all  his  time  to 
travel  and  study,  the  young  man  devoted  himself  to 
the  learning  of  his  day,  which  consisted  largely  in 
so-called  philosophic  speculations  with  almost  no 
foundation.  Every  school  made  its  own  guesses  as 
to  the  origin  of  the  universe,  the  destiny  of  man,  the 
true  wisdom  in  the  conduct  of  life.  When  Justin 
represents  himself  as  having  gone  to  four  teachers  in 
succession,  a  Stoic,  who  could  tell  him  nothing  about 


Justin  Finds  a  Better  Philosophy.  143 

God,  and  thought  that  there  •  was  nothing  worth 
knowing  in  that  direction,  a  Peripatetic,  who  wanted 
regular  pay  for  his  teaching,  so  that  it  might  be 
profitable  to  both  teacher  and  taught, — Justin  was 
much  disgusted  with  him, — a  Pythagorean,  who 
could  not  undertake  to  teach  him  anything,  until 
he  should  first  have  become  proficient  in  music  and 
geometry  and  astronomy,  and  finally  a  Platonist, 
who  for  a  while  really  satisfied  his  craving  for  noble 
thoughts,  he  may,  of  course,  be  giving  us  an  imag- 
inary history,  intended  to  suggest  how  unsatisfactory 
all  other  teachings  would  be  found  to  be  in  compari- 
son with  Christianity,  but  more  probably  it  is  the 
simple  truth.  Many  such  a  man  must  probably  have 
gone  the  round  of  the  heathen  philosophers,  not  find- 
ing the  best  till  the  last,  and  then  had  Justin's  ex- 
perience of  finding  something  better  still. 

This  Samaritan  who  had  never  heard  of  Moses, 
and  knew  nothing  of  his  people's  traditions,  ascribes 
his  conversion  to  a  providential  meeting  with  an  old 
man  who  found  him  walking  near  the  sea — this  could 
not  have  been  at  Flavia  Neapolis.  Perhaps  it  may 
have  been  at  Ephesus,  where  Eusebius  tells  us  that 
Justin  was  once  resident, — and  drew  him  into  talk 
in  which  the  stranger  showed  Justin  that  Platonism 
was  not  as  full  an  answer  to  the  soul's  questions  as 
he  had  thought,  and  introduced  him  to  the  study  of 
the  Old  Testament  prophets  as  witnesses  to  the  re- 
ligion of  Jesus  Christ.  Already,  as  we  have  seen, 
Justin  had  come  to  feel  that  Christians  must  be  men 
who  took  life  seriously.  These  could  not  be  men 
given  up  to  vicious  self-indulgence,  who  would  en- 


144  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

dure  tortures  and  death  rather  than  go  through  a 
mere  verbal  form  of  denying  their  Christ  and  prom- 
ising to  forsake  their  religion.  A  set  of  cannibals 
and  debauchees,  such  as  Christians  were  very  com- 
monly believed  to  be,  would,  of  course,  take  any 
number  of  oaths  to  save  their  lives,  and  go  home  and 
break  them  with  equal  facility.  So  much  Justin  had 
felt  already.  Now  he  found,  to  his  own  amazement, 
that  this  despised  Christianity  was  the  one  great  sat- 
isfying philosophy  of  the  world  and  life.  As  such 
he  embraced  it,  as  such  he  began  diligently  to  teach 
it.  He  seems  to  have  done  so  for  a  term  of  years  at 
Ephesus.  Then  he  came,  wearing  still  the  philoso- 
pher's cloak,  the  badge  of  a  professional  teacher  of 
the  higher  subjects, — the  forerunner,  if  it  be  not 
indeed  the  first  form,  of  the  academic  gown  of 
mediaeval  universities  and  of  some  modern  pulpits, — 
and  opened  a  school  at  Rome. 

A  "  good  Samaritan  "  our  philosopher  proved  him- 
self to  be,  in  that  when  his  brethren  were  in  distress, 
he  would  not  withhold  himself  from  going  to  their 
help.  The  deepening  danger  of  Christians  under 
Antoninus  was  to  him  only  a 'more  pressing  reason 
for  coming  forward  openly  in  their  defense.  To 
Antoninus  Pius,  therefore,  and  to  the  future  Em- 
peror, Marcus  Aurelius,  already  associated  in  the 
government  of  the  empire,  Justin  presented  two 
Apologies,  the  second,  however,  being  only  a  sort  of 
postscript  to  the  first.  There  is  a  splendid  boldness 
in  them  which  leaves  one  wondering  whether  the 
writer  went  into  hiding,  like  Jeremiah  of  old,  while 
another  person  put  his  book  into  the  ruler's  hand. 


Christians  not  to  be  Condemned  for  a  Name.     145 

In  form  his  address  is  a  petition  in  his  own  name 
to  the  Emperor,  to  his  associate  Caesars,  and  to  the 
Senate  and  People  of  Rome, — the  argument  was 
probably  aimed  to  win  converts  from  the  people 
even  more  than  to  secure  justice  from  the  ruler, — 
uin  behalf  of  those  of  all  nations  who  are  unjustly 
hated  and  wantonly  abused,  myself  being  one  of 
them."  The  Emperor  is  reminded  of  his  title  of 
Pius.  "  Do  ye  who  are  called  pious  and  philoso- 
phers, guardians  of  justice  and  lovers  of  learning, 
give  good  heed  and  hearken  to  my  address ;  and  if 
ye  are  indeed  such,  ye  will  show  it."  "  We  reckon 
that  no  evil  can  be  done  us,  unless  we  be  convicted 
as  evil  doers."  "  You  can  kill,  but  you  cannot  hurt 
us."  "  Rulers  who  prefer  prejudice  to  truth  have 
only  the  power  of  robbers  in  a  desert."  Such  is 
Justin's  defiant  answer  to  the  imperial  ruling  that 
simply  to  be  a  Christian  is  enough  to  constitute  a 
capital  offense.  That  the  name  should  be  a  con- 
demnation  in  itself,  pleads  Justin,  (Apol.  iii.),  is 
manifestly  unfair.  Indeed,  the  name  ought  to  sug- 
gest that  these  are  a  most  excellent  people.  He  re- 
fers to  a  confusion  that  the  heathen  were  always 
making  between  Christus  and  chrestus,  the  latter  be- 
ing the  Greek  word  for  a  kindly,  pleasant-tempered 
soul,  with  a  touch  of  contempt  in  it,  however,  as  in 
our  use  of  the  word  "  easy-going,"  from  which  the 
New  Testament  use  was  just  beginning  to  raise  it. 
It  is  doubtful  how  far  it  was  a  wise  argument  for 
Justin  to  use.  Certainly  man}-  of  his  heathen  neigh- 
bors were  unready  as  yet  to  admire  a  man  for  being 
J 


146  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

chrestus.     It  is  Christ  who  has  taught  men  that  a 
kind  heart  is  an  ornament  of  a  great  soul. 

Secondly,  Justin  disposes  (Apol.  vi.)  of  the  charge 
of  atheism.  The  early  Christians  were  divided  in 
opinion  about  the  heathen  gods,  whether  they  were 
evil  spirits,  or  dead  men  about  whose  memory  lying 
legends  had  grown  up,  or  finally,  mere  names  with 
no  real  existence  whatever  back  of  them.  Justin 
adopts  the  first  view  warmly.  "  All  the  gods  of  the 
heathen  are  demons,"  he  read  in  his  Greek  version 
of  Ps.  xcvi.  5,  where  we  have  more  correctly,  "  are 
but  idols."  "  We  confess,"  he  says,  "  that  we  are 
atheists  as  far  as  gods  of  this  kind  are  concerned, 
but  not  with  respect  to  the  most  true  God,  the 
Father  of  righteousness  and  temperance  and  the 
other  virtues,  who  is  free  from  all  impurity.1  But 
both  Him  and  the  Son  who  came  forth  from  Him 
and  taught  us  these  things,  and  the  host  of  the  other 
good  angels,  who  follow  and  are  made  like  to  Him, 
and  the  prophetic  Spirit,  we  worship  and  adore, 
knowing  them  in  reason  and  truth,  and  declaring 
without  grudging  to  every  one  who  wishes  to  learn, 
as  we  have  been  taught."  2 


1  We  must  remember  that  almost  every  heathen  god  had  his 
legends  of  such  moral  vileness  as  could  be  not  be  told  in  these 
pages.  Men  like  Antoninus  Pius  and  Marcus  Aurelius  had  a 
vague  idea  of  a  passionless  Supreme  Being  somewhere  back  of  all 
the  powers  of  the  universe,  but  that  unknown  force  received  no 
worship  and  was  not  regarded  as  having  any  feeling  about  the 
world  or  men. 

aThat  Justin  should  speak  here  of  Christians  as  worshipping 
and  adoring  angels,  has  greatly  scandalized  many  good  people. 
Fearful  and  wonderful  are  the  attempts  of  critics  to  translate  his 
sentence  into  some  other  meaning.  It  ought  to  be  taken  calmly 
just  as  it  stands.     Christianity  raised  enormously,  but  of  course 


'    Justin's  Argument    Continued.  147 

But  thirdly,  some  Christians  have  been  found 
guilty  of  heinous  crimes.  Be  it  so,  says  Justin. 
All  we  ask  is  a  fair  trial.  Again,  Christians  do  not 
use  idolatrous  methods  of  worship.  But  then  such 
methods  are  absurd  and  unphilosophical.  Christians 
are  charged  with  aiming  to  set  up  a  kingdom  of  their 
own,  apart  from  the  government  of  the  Emperor. 
True,  but  it  is  not  an  earthly  kingdom,  as  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  they  welcome  death  as  a  means  of 
entering  into  it.  The  virtues  of  Christians  are  set 
forth,  and  it  is  boldly  claimed  that  they  are  of  great 
value  to  the  empire  because  of  their  loyalty  and  their 
good  behavior.  The  foolishness  and  immorality  of 
the  heathen  religious  teachings  is  insisted  on,  and 
there  is  a  little  digression  on  the  resurrection  of  the 

only  gradually,  the  common  idea  of  what  is  meant  by  "worship  " 
and  of  what  is  meant  by  "god."  We  to-day  represent  our  new 
idea  of  what  "god  "  can  mean  by  spelling  it  with  a  capital  letter, 
"God."  We  represent  our  new  idea  of  what  "worship"  can 
mean  by  refusing  to  use  the  word  for  anything  lower  than  that 
high  gift  which  we  reserve  for  God  alone.  Yet  even  to  this  day, 
and  after  all  our  controversies  about  the  proper  limitations  of 
"  worship,"  the  Church  of  England  Prayer  Book  still  retains  in 
the  office  of  Holy  Matrimony  the  phrase,  "With  my  body  I  thee 
worship,"  and  both  in  England  and  in  America  men  in  certain 
honorable  stations  are  spoken  of,  and  spoken  to,  as  "  woishipfui." 
All  this  goes  back  to  a  time  when  that  English  word  "worship  " 
did  not  necessarily  mean  more  than  "treat  with  distinguished 
honor."  Justin  had  several  grades  of  meaning  in  his  mind  for 
such  words  as  "worship"  and  "adore."  When  he  was  dealing 
with  a  heathen  charge  that  Christianity  swept  the  invisible  world 
clear  of  objects  of  worship  and  left  it  a  lonely  waste,  nothing  was 
more  natural  for  him  than  to  take  the  words  on  their  heathen  level 
when  telling  the  heathen  man  that  the  universe  was  as  full  of 
friends  to  the  Christian  as  it  could  seem  to  him,  only  the  friends 
were  vastly  better  friends  to  have.  When  writing  elsewhere  of 
Christian  worship  from  a  Christian  standpoint,  our  philosopher  is 
perfectly  evangelical,  never  hinting  at  any  worship  (in  our  sense 
of  the  word)  of  any  other  powers  than  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost. 


148  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

bocty  as  no  more  incredible  than  that  human  bodies 
should  originate  as  every  one  knows  that  they  do. 

The  bulk  of  the  book  (xxx.-lx.)  is  then  given  to 
showing  how  the  leading  facts  of  the  Christian  be- 
lief were  foretold  by  Christian  prophets  ages  before 
they  came  to  pass,  a  few  of  these  chapters  being  oc- 
cupied with  an  exposition  of  Justin's  idea  that  evil 
spirits  had  got  hold  of  some  of  these  prophecies  and 
twisted  them  into  parodies  as  part  of  the  heathen 
mythology.  Hence,  Justin  would  say,  come  all  the 
stories  of  wonder-working  sons  of  God,  of  virgin 
births,  and  of  resurrections  from  death.  And  here 
it  may  be  noted  that  this  Christian  philosopher  of  the 
middle  of  the  second  century  makes  copious  use  of 
the  argument  from  prophecy,  and  none  at  ail  of  the 
argument  from  miracle.  He  believes  in  miracles 
profoundly.  But  he  does  not  use  them  to  base  an 
argument  on.  It  is  sometimes  said,  especially  by 
people  who  do  not  know  much  about  it,  that  the 
Christians  of  the  early  daj^s  were  a  superstitious  lot 
of  people,  ready  to  believe  anything  that  was  pleas- 
antly marvellous.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  a  superstitious 
age  is  apt  to  be  incredulous  also.  When  people  are 
hearing  of  marvels  constantly,  a  few  more  or  less 
make  very  little  difference.  When  miracles  are  al- 
leged to  prove  half  a  dozen  opposing  religions,  how 
much  do  any  of  them  prove?  The  resurrection  of 
our  Lord  was  a  different  sort  of  marvel  from  the 
common  ones,  and  it  rested  on  different,  and  over- 
whelmingly strong,  evidence.  Christians  did  appeal 
to  it  as  to  a  thing  certain.  But  as  to  our  Lord's  mir- 
acles generally,  Christians  of  Justin's  type  believed 


How   Christians  Were  Regenerated.  149 

in  the  miracles  because  first  they  had  been  led  to  be- 
lieve in  the  Christ.  They  did  not  believe  in  the 
Christ  because  of  the  miracles.  The  only  marvels 
that  Justin  appeals  to  in  order  to  persuade  a  heathen, 
are  the  marvel  of  prophecy  and  the  marvel  of  a  life 
changed  for  the  better. 

The  last  eight  chapters  of  the  Apology  are  of  im- 
mense value  to  us,  because  they  contain  our  first  ac- 
count of  Christian  worship  and  Christian  ceremo- 
nies from  a  Christian  source.  In  lxi.  the  writer 
describes  a  Christian  Baptism  : 

"  I  will  also  relate  the  manner  in  which  we  dedi- 
cated ourselves  to  God,  when  Ave  had  been  made 
new  through  Christ,  lest  if  we  omit  this  we  seem  to 
be  unfair  in  the  explanation  we  are  making.  As 
many  as  are  persuaded  and  believe  that  what  we 
teach  and  say  is  true,  and  undertake  to  be  able  to 
live  accordingly,  are  instructed  to  pray  and  to  en- 
treat God  with  fasting  for  the  remission  of  their  sins 
that  are  past,  we  praying  and  fasting  with  them. 
Then  they  are  brought  by  us  where  there  is  water, 
and  are  regenerated  in  the  same  manner  in  which  we 
were  ourselves  regenerated.  For  in  the  name  of 
God,  the  Father  and  Lord  of  the  universe,  and  of 
our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
they  then  receive  the  washing  with  water.  For 
Christ  also  said :  Except  ye  be  born  again,  ye  shall  not 
enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven" 

He  points  to  the  impossibility  of  being  born  again 
in  a  physical  sense,  quotes  Isa.  i.  16-20,  as  a  prophecy 
that  repentant  sinners  were  to  escape  from  their  sins 
by  a  washing,  and  goes  on  thus : 


150  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

"  And  for  this  we  have  learned  from  the  Apostles 
this  reason.  Since  at  our  birth  we  are  born  without 
our  own  knowledge  or  choice  by  our  parents'  coming 
together,  and  were  brought  up  in  bad  habits  and 
wicked  training,  in  order  that  we  may  not  remain 
the  children  of  necessity  and  of  ignorance,  but  may 
become  the  children  of  choice  and  knowledge,  and 
may  obtain  in  the  water  the  remission  of  sins  for- 
merly committed,  there  is  pronounced  over  him  who 
chooses  to  be  born  again,  and  has  repented  of  his 
sins,  the  name  of  God,  the  Father  and  Lord  of  the 
universe,  he  who  leads  to  the  laver  the  person  that  is 
to  be  washed,  calling  Him  by  this  name  [i.  e.  '  God ' 
and  the  '  Father ']  alone.  For  no  one  can  utter  the 
name  of  the  ineffable  God,  and  if  any  one  dares  to 
say  that  there  is  a  name,  he  raves  with  a  hopeless 
madness.  And  this  washing  is  called  illumination, 
because  they  who  learn  these  things  are  illuminated 
in  their  understandings.  And  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ,  who  was  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate,  and 
in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  through  the 
prophets  foretold  all  things  about  Jesus,  is  the  per- 
son washed." 

There  follow  three  chapters  of  digression,  begin- 
ning with  deriving  all  heathen  ceremonies  of  purifi- 
cation from  Isaiah's  "  Wash  you,  make  you  clean," 
by  the  agency  of  evil  spirits,  then  turning  off  to  say 
that  heathen  priests  got  their  custom  of  going  bare- 
foot into  the  shrines  of  their  idolatry  from  the  word 
spoken  to  Moses,  "  Put  off  thy  shoes  from  off  thy 
feet,  for  the  place  whereon  thou  standest  is  holy 
ground."     In  Chapter  lxi.  he  resumes  his  account: 


The  Food   Called  a  Eucharist.  151 


"But  we,  after  we  have  thus  washed  him  who 
has  been  convinced  and  has  assented  to  our  teach- 
ing, bring  him  to  the  place  where  those  who  are 
called  brethren  are  assembled,  in  order  that  we  may 
offer  hearty  prayers  in  common,  for  ourselves  and  for 
the  illuminated  person,  and  for  all  others  in  every 
place,  that  we  may  be  counted  worthy,  now  that  we 
have  learned  the  truth,  by  our  works  also  to  be 
found  good  citizens  and  keepers  of  the  command- 
ments, so  that  we  may  be  saved  with  an  everlasting 
salvation.  Having  ended  the  prayers,  we  salute  one 
another  with  a  kiss.  There  is  then  brought  to  the 
president  of  the  brethren  bread  and  a  cup  of  wine 
mixed  with  water,  and  he  taking  them  gives  praise 
and  glory  to  the  Father  of  the  universe  through  the 
name  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  offers 
thanks  at  considerable  length  for  our  being  counted 
worthy  to  obtain  these  thing  at  his  hands.  And 
when  he  has  concluded  the  prayers  and  thanksgiv- 
ings, all  the  people  present  express  their  assent  by 
saying  Amen.  This  word  Amen  answers  in  the 
Hebrew  language  to  our  '  so  be  it/  And  when  the 
president  has  given  thanks,  and  all  the  people  have 
expressed  their  assent,  those  who  are  called  by  us 
deacons  give  to  each  of  those  present  to  partake  of 
the  bread  and  wine  mixed  with  water,  over  which 
the  thanksgiving  was  pronounced,  and  to  those  who 
are  absent  they  carry  away  a  portion.  And  this 
food  is  called  among  us  a  Eucharist :,  of  which  no  one 
is  allowed  to  partake  but  the  man  who  believes  that 
the  things  which  we  teach  are  true,  and  who  has 
been  washed  with  the  washing  that  is  for  the  remis- 


152  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

bio  11  of  sins  unci  unto  regeneration,  and  who  is  so 
living  as  Christ  has  enjoined.  For  not  as  common 
bread  and  common  drink  do  we  receive  these,  but  in 
like  manner  as  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,  having 
been  made  flesh  by  the  Word  of  God,1  had  both  flesh 
and  blood  for  our  salvation,  so  likewise  have  we 
been  taught  that  the  food  which  is  blessed  by  the 
pra}rer  of  His  Word,  and  from  which  our  blood  and 
flesh  by  transmutation  are  nourished,  is  the  flesh 
and  blood  of  that  Jesus  who  was  made  flesh.  For 
the  Apostles,  in  the  memoirs  composed  b}r  them, 
which  are  called  Gospels,  have  thus  delivered  unto 
us  what  was  enjoined  upon  them, — that  Jesus  took 
bread,  and  when  He  had  given  thanks,  said :  Do  this 
in  remembrance  of  Me :  this  is  My  Body ;  and  that 
after  the  same  manner,  having  taken  the  cup,  and 
given  thanks,  He  said,  This  is  My  Blood,  and  gave 
it  to  them  alone." 

In  the  next  chapter,  lxvii.,  Justin  goes  on  to  an 
account  of  the  ordinary  Sunday  morning  service : 

44  And  on  the  day  called  Sunday  all,  whether 
living  in  town  or  country,  gather  together  to  one 
place,  and  the  memoirs  of  the  Apostles  or  the  writ- 
ings of  the  prophets  are  read  as  long  as  time  permits. 
Then,  when  the  reader  has  ceased,  the  president 
verbally  instructs  and  exhorts  to  the  imitation  of 
these  good  things.     Then  we  all  rise  together  and 

1Note  that  in  Justin's  mind  the  Holy  Ghost  has  the  title  of 
the  Word  of  God,  as  being  the  expression  of  the  Father's  mind,  as 
well  as  the  Son.  It  is  thought  by  some,  with  much  reason,  that 
the  phrase,  "prayer  of  His  Word,"  a  few  lines  farther  on,  refers 
to  a  prayer  of  Invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  is  always 
found  in  Oriental  Liturgies,  and  leaves  traces  in  the  Liturgies  of 
the  West. 


The  Regular  Sunday  Morning  Sere  ice.       153 

pray,  and  as  we  before  said,  when  our  prayer  is 
ended,  bread  and  wine  and  water  are  brought,  and 
the  president  in  like  manner  offers  prayers  and 
thanksgivings  according  to  his  ability,  and  the  peo- 
ple assent,  saying,  Amen,  and  there  is  a  distribution 
to  each  and  a  participation  of  that  over  which  thanks 
have  been  given,  and  to  those  who  are  absent  a  por- 
tion is  sent  by  the  deacons.  And  they  also  who  are 
well  to  do  and  willing  give  what  each  thinks  fit,  and 
what  is  collected  is  deposited  with  the  president,  who 
succors  the  orphans  and  widows,  and  those  who  are 
in  bonds,  and  the  strangers  sojourning  among  us, 
and,  in  a  word,  takes  care  of  all  who  are  in  need. 
And  Sunday  is  the  day  on  which  we  all  hold  our 
common  assembly,  because  it  was  on  the  first  day 
that  God.  having  wrought  a  change  in  the  darkness 
and  matter,  made  the  world,  and  Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour  on  the  same  day  rose  from  the  dead.  So 
He  was  crucified  on  the  next  day  before  that  of 
Saturn,1  and  on  the  day  after  that  of  Saturn,  which 
is  the  day  of  the  Sun,  He  appeared  to  His  apostles 
and  disciples,  and  taught  them  these  things  which 
we  have  submitted  to  you  also  for  }rour  consider- 
ation." 

All  comment  on  these  interesting  disclosures  must 
be  reserved  for  later  chapters.  We  are  concerned 
here  with  showing  simply  what  Justin  had  to  offer 
in  behalf  of  the  Church.  We  may  do  well  to  re- 
member in  the  meantime  that  his  object  was  only  to 

JJustia  uses  this  quaint  circumlocution,  "  the  day  before  Sat- 
urday," because  he  is  unwilling  to  call  the  day  of  our  Lord's 
death  by  its  Roman  name,  "the  day  of  Venus,"  which  is  the 
same  as  to  say,  "  the  day  of  lust." 


154  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tell  the  unbeliever  enough  to  show  that  Christian 
procedures  were  blameless.  Probably  his  brief  ex- 
position of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  was  meant 
simply  to  suggest  how  innocent  a  foundation  under- 
lay the  shocking  charges  of  eating  human  flesh  and 
drinking  blood  which  were  brought  against  the 
Christians  on  every  side.  The  statement  was  wrung 
from  him  because  it  had  got  out  that  Christians  used 
language  of  a  suspicious  sound,  and  to  tell  exactly 
how  they  used  it  was  the  only  possible  defense 
against  the  most  cruel  misunderstanding.  Having 
thus  made  his  defense  Justin  closes  with  renewing 
briefly,  and  with  simple  dignity,  his  plea  that  men 
should  not  be  tortured  and  put  to  death  without 
some  proof  of  some  definite  wrongdoing,  appealing 
also  to  the  policy  of  Hadrian,  the  preceding  em- 
peror, and  to  the  rescript  addressed  by  him  to 
Minucius  Fundanus.  Justin  gives  that  rescript  as 
an  appendix  to  his  work. 

That  this  First  Apology  accomplished  nothing 
with  the  rulers  of  Rome  is  evident  from  the  Second 
Apology,  which  seems  to  have  followed  shortly  after. 
It  was  drawn  out  by  a  characteristic  example  of  the 
harsher  policy  of  the  Antonines.  A  woman  of  evil 
life  had  been  converted  to  Christianity.  Her  vicious 
husband  tried  to  drag  her  back  to  such  evil  courses 
as  he  still  delighted  in,  and  she  refused.  Finally  she 
sent  him  a  writing  of  divorce,  as  her  only  safety,  and 
he,  enraged,  denounced  her  as  a  Christian.  While 
she  was  awaiting  trial,  he  succeeded  in  getting  a 
certain  Ptolemreus,  who  had  been  his  wife's  in- 
structor, accused  too.     Ptolemseus  is  brought  before 


An  Example  of  Roman  Justice.  155 

the  City  Prefect,  Urbicus,  and  asked  the  one  ques- 
tion, "  Are  you  a  Christian  ?  "  On  his  answering 
that  he  is,  he  is  ordered  to  immediate  execution.  A 
certain  Lucius,  standing  by,  cries  out  in  protest 
against  such  a  sentence.  "  Why  have  you  punished 
this  man,  not  as  an  adulterer,  nor  fornicator,  nor 
murderer,  nor  thief,  nor  robber,  nor  convicted  of  any 
crime  at  all,  but  who  has  only  confessed  that  he  is 
called  by  the  name  of  Christian  ?  "  "  You  also  seem 
to  be  such  a  one,"  was  the  judge's  reply,  and  when 
Lucius  acknowledged  it,  he  too  was  ordered  to  ex- 
ecution, giving  thanks  for  such  a  death,  and  straight- 
way after  another  followed  in  the  same  course. 
Justin  declares  that  he  expects  to  suffer  in  like 
manner.  More  especially,  there  is  a  philosopher  of 
the  Cynic  School,  Crescens  by  name,  who  writes 
against  Christianity,  and  is  bitter  against  Justin  for 
refuting  him.  He  will  probably  bring  his  Christian 
adversary  before  the  judge.  But  oh  !  if  the  Em- 
peror would  order  a  public  disputation  between  the 
Cynic  and  the  Christian  teacher,  and  himself  attend 
it,  that  would  be  a  worthy  deed ! 

How  Justin  escaped  the  natural  consequences  of 
this  boldness,  we  cannot  tell.  He  lived  to  write 
several  other  books,  of  which  but  one  remains  to  us, 
his  Dialogue  with  the  Jew  Trypho,  a  work  longer  than 
the  two  Apologies  put  together,  presenting  the 
Church's  answer  to  the  Jewish  objection.  It  is  not 
worth  while  to  try  to  analyze  it  here,  but  it  may  be 
said  that  it  is  of  high  value  as  showing  what  was 
the  Christian  view  of  some  great  matters  in  Justin's 
time,  and  that  it  is  a  storehouse  of  illustrations  of 


156  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

that  allegorizing  method  of  interpreting  the  Old  Tes- 
tament Scripture  which  we  have  noted  in  the  Epistle 
of  Barnabas,  and  which  seems  to  have  prevailed  uni- 
versally in  those  early  days.  After  a  few  more 
years  of  great  usefulness  the  natural  end  did  come 
at  last.  Before  a  magistrate  named  Rusticus, — we 
know  not  in  what  year  precisely,  but  Rusticus  be- 
came Prefect  of  the  City  A.  D.  163, — Justin  was 
brought,  with  six  companions,  one  a  woman,  to  answer 
to  this  same  sole  charge  of  Christianity.  All  were 
steadfast,  and  all  were  sentenced  to  suffer  the  hor- 
rors of  a  Roman  scourging,  and  then  to  be  beheaded. 
So  they  glorified  God. 

The  death  of  Justin  brings  us  within  the  reign  of 
Marcus  Aurelius,  A.  D.  161-180.  Under  that  great 
emperor  and  noble  man  the  imperial  policy  toward 
Christians  was  technically  the  same  that  it  had  been 
for  a  hundred  years,  but  practically,  harder  than 
ever  before.  Marcus  seems  to  have  believed  pro- 
foundly every  vilest  charge  against  Christian  belief 
and  life,  and  being  himself  high  minded  and  con- 
scientious, he  not  only  despised  such  a  people,  he 
raged  against  them.  His  feeling  in  the  matter 
seems  to  have  been  due  particularly  to  the  influence 
of  an  old  teacher  of  his,  the  philosopher  Fronto,  to 
whom  he  was  ardently  attached.  Fronto's  attack 
did  the  Church  a  service  in  that  it  brought  out  an- 
other notable  apology,  the  Octavius  of  Marcus  Minu- 
cius  Felix,  written  probably  in  the  last  year  or  two 
of  the  life  of  Antoninus   Pius.1     The  writer   was  a 

1  Is  Minucius  Felix  to  be  dated  about  A.  D.  160?  or  about  A. 
D.  230-235?  He  seems  certainly  to  have  borrowed  from.  Tertul- 


The  First  Christian  Booh  in  the  Latin  Tongue.    157 

Roman  lawyer,  "of  no  mean  ability/'  as  we  are  told 
by  one  of  the  latest  writers  of  our  period,  Lactan- 
tius,  but  his  birthplace  seems  to  have  been  the  same 
town,  of  Cirta  in  North  Africa,  from  which  Fronto 
himself  had  come  forth  to  win  fame  and  fortune. 

The  Octavius  is  an  account  of  a  discussion  between 
two  friends  of  the  writer,  Octavius,  a  Christian,  and 
Caecilius,  a  heathen,  who  had  gone  with  him  to  Ostia 
for  a  seaside  holiday.  It  contains  almost  nothing  of 
Christian  doctrine  or  Christian  practice.  Its  argu- 
ment is  for  the  unity  of  God  and  for  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body,  and  to  defend  the  Christians  from 
the  charge  of  unspeakable  immoralities.  Beautiful 
as  its  style  is, — and  so  competent  a  critic  as  Dean 
Milman  said  of  it,  that  it  recalled  the  golden  days  of 
Latin  prose  composition,— it  would  be  of  smallest 
interest  to  the  historical  student  but  for  this  one 
consideration :  if  we  are  right  in  dating  it  in  the 
last  year  of  Antoninus,  this  is  the  first  Christian  book 
in  the  Latin  tongue,  the  first  abiding  utterance  of 

lian's  Apologeticus,  or  Tertullian  from  him.  Salmon  (Dictionary 
of  Christian  Biography,  Minucius)  adopts  the  later  date,  Lightfoot 
(Ignatius  andPolycarp,  I.  534.)  the  earlier.  Two  points  favor  placing 
him  here.  (1)  He  makes  Fro  u  to  his  representative  of  the  attacks 
on  Christians,  which  he  would  not  have  done  60  or  70  years  after 
Fronto's  death.  (2)  In  arguing  the  unity  of  God,  he  urges  the 
absurdity  of  trying  to  rule  any  great  empire  with  a  divided  au- 
thority. "Who  ever  heard,"  he  says,  "of  a  partnership  in  su- 
preme power  (societatem  regni)  that  either  began  with  honesty,  or 
came  to  an  end  without  blood?"  The  rule  of  Marcus  Aure- 
lius  saw  two  such  partnerships,  of  Aurelius  and  Yerus  (161-169), 
and  of  Aurelius  and  his  son  Coin  mod  us  (177-180).  It  would  seem 
as  if  Minucius  must  have  written  before  these  examples  had  come 
to  light.  Of  course,  he  may  have  written  fifty  years  after  the 
death  of  Aurelius,  and  written  so  carelessly  as  to  use  an  argument 
that  any  one  with  a  decent  knowledge  of  history,  or  any  old  man 
with  a  good  memory  for  politics,  could  instantly  demolish.  But 
that  is  hardly  likely. 


158  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Latin  Christianity.  The  family  name  Minucius 
would  seem  to  imply  a  man  of  good  blood,  of  the 
same  large  family  connection  with  that  Minucius 
Fundanus  to  whom  Hadrian  sent  the  rescript.  It  is 
a  step  gained  when  the  Christian  cause  has  for  a  de- 
fender a  gentleman  of  social  standing  and  a  member 
of  the  Roman  bar.  It  is  another  step,  when  the 
Christian  answer  begins  to  be  heard  in  the  Roman 
speech,  because  certainly  Latin  could  gain  a  hear- 
ing in  some  quarters  where  Greek  would  not  find 
entrance.  It  will  be  nearly  thirty  years  yet  before 
we  come  to  a  Roman  bishop,  Victor,  with  a  Latin 
rather  than  a  Greek  name.  Here  for  the  first  time 
we  find  Christianity  so  well  assimilated  at  Rome  as 
that  a  Roman  speaks  for  Christ  in  the  Roman 
speech.  It  is  noteworthy  that  this  very  case  is  that 
of  a  Roman  born  in  North  Africa.  That  province 
was  the  nurse,  if  not  the  mother,  of  Latin  Christi- 
anity. Rome  was  so  much  dominated  at  this  period 
by  foreign  fashions,  and  particularly  by  Greek  taste, 
Greek  feeling,  Greek  thought,  Greek  literature,  that 
the  Roman  character  did  not  for  long  get  a  chance 
to  show  what  it  would  make  of  Christ's  religion, 
which  every  nation  colors  with  its  own  individuality, 
nor  what  Christ's  religion  would  make  that  strong 
character  to  be.  Over  Carthage,  Rome's  ancient 
rival,  and  over  the  province  that  had  Carthage  for 
its  metropolis,  the  Latin  tongue  and  the  Latin  tem- 
per had  a  sway  that  they  had  not  in  their  proper 
home.  It  was  in  the  province  of  Africa  that  the 
Bible  was  first  translated  into  Latin,  a  version  some- 
what rude  and  provincial,  to  be  sure,  and  not  always 


A  Boman's    View  of  Martyrdom.  159 

accurate,  but  a  forming  force  among  readers  who 
knew  no  Greek,  while  as  yet  all  Italy  was  without 
such  a  treasure.  Latin  Christianity  had  its  cradle 
in  North  Africa,  and  whether  it  was  the  Roman 
lawyer,  Minucius,  or  the  Carthaginian  lawyer,  Ter- 
tullian,  that  first  gave  it  voice  in  argument,  it  was 
in  any  case  an  African,  rather  than  a  Roman  im- 
pulse to  which  the  first  Latin  argument  is  due.  Yet 
after  all,  though  it  is  the  African  education  that 
makes  the  Roman  lawyer  plead  for  Christianity  in 
Latin  rather  than  in  Greek,  it  is  the  old  Roman  tem- 
per that  speaks  out  in  the  extract  (Octavius,  xxxvii.) 
which  shall  represent  Minucius  to  us,  and  at  the 
same  time  illustrate  the  history  in  which  he  had  been 
called  to  bear  a  part : 

"  How  beautiful  is  the  spectacle  to  God,  when  a 
Christian  does  battle  with  pain  !  When  he  is  drawn 
ip  against  threats  and  punishments  and  tortures, 
when  mocking  the  noise  of  death  he  treads  under 
foot  the  torture  of  the  executioner,  when  he  raises 
up  his  liberty  against  kings  and  princes  and  yields 
to  God  alone,  to  whom  he  belongs,  when,  triumphant 
and  victorious,  he  tramples  upon  the  very  man  who 
has  pronounced  sentence  against  him !  For  he  has 
conquered  who  obtains  that  for  which  he  contends. 
What  soldier  would  not  provoke  peril  with  greater 
boldness  under  the  eye  of  his  general?  For  no  one 
receives  a  reward  before  his  trial,  and  yet  the  gen- 
eral does  not  give  what  he  has  not :  he  cannot  pre- 
serve life,  but  he  can  make  the  warfare  glorious. 
But  God's  soldier  is  neither  forsaken  in  suffering, 
nor  brought  to  an  end  by  death.     Thus  the  Chris- 


160  The  Post- Apostolic  A<je. 

tian  may  seem  to  be  miserable  ;  he  cannot  be  really 
found  to  be  so.  You  yourselves  extol  unfortunate 
men  to  the  skies, — Mucius  Seeevola,  for  instance, 
who  when  he  had  failed  in  his  attempt  against  the 
king,  would  have  perished  among  enemies,  if  he  had 
not  sacrificed  his  right  hand.  And  how  many  of  our 
people  have  borne  that  not  their  right  hand  only, 
but  their  whole  body,  should  be  burned,  burned  up 
without  any  cries  of  pain,  especially  when  they  had 
it  in  their  power  to  be  let  go.  Do  I  compare  men 
with  Mucius  or  Aquilius,  or  with  Regulus?  Yet 
boys  and  young  women  among  us  treat  with  con- 
tempt crosses  and  tortures,  wild  beasts,  and  all  the 
bugbears  of  punishments,  with  the  inspired  patience 
of  suffering.  And  do  you  not  perceive,  O  wretched 
men,  that  there  is  nobody  who  either  is  willing  with- 
out reason  to  undergo  punishment,  or  is  able  without 
God  to  bear  tortures." 

But  now  the  combat  thickens,  this  great  conflict 
between  cruel  force  on  one  side  and  reason  and  faith 
and  patience  on  the  other.  Between  the  years  150 
and  180,  the  year  of  the  death  of  Marcus  Aurelius, 
we  must  imagine  apologies  pouring  in  thick  and  fast, 
— the  Address  to  the  Greeks  of  Tatian,  known  as 
"  the  Assyrian,"  a  pupil  of  Justin  Martj^r  at  Rome, 
compiler  of  the  first  Harmony  of  the  Gospels?  and 
founder  afterwards  of  a  heretical  sect;  the  Embassy 

1  The  recent  discovery  of  certain  Arabic  copies  of  this  work, 
called  the  Diatessaron,  has  greatly  strengthened  the  proof  that  our 
present  four  Gospels  were  used  in  the  Church,  and  venerated  as  of 
Apostolic  origin,  within  the  first  half  of  the  second  century,  and 
therefore  cannot  have  been  brand-new  writings  just  produced  in 
that  period,  as  certain  non-Christian  writers  have  labored  to  show 
that  they  were. 


Apologies  Become  Numerous.  161 

and  treatise  On  the  Resurrection  of  Athenagoras,  an 
Athenian  philosopher,  said  by  tradition  to  have  been 
the  first  teacher  of  the  famous  theological  school  of 
Alexandria,  and  certainly  the  most  finished  writer 
among  the  Greek  apologists ;  an  Address  to  the 
Greeks  and  a  Letter  to  Dioc/netus,  which  may  be  as- 
cribed perhaps  to  an  Athenian,  Ambrose,  but  are  in- 
volved in  much  obscurity  (cf.  an  interesting  article, 
Epistle  to  Diognetus,  in  the  Dictionary  of  Christian 
Biography)  ;  an  Apology  addressed  to  Marcus  Aure- 
lius  and  his  son  by  Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  a  vo- 
luminous writer  and  saintly  man,  of  whom  we  shall 
hear  more  in  another  connection ;  the  three  books, 
To  Autotycus,  addressed  to  a  heathen  friend  by  The- 
ophilus,  fifth  successor  of  Ignatius  in  the  bishopric 
of  the  Syrian  Antioch,  books  where  we  find  the 
word  Trinity  for  the  first  time  in  Christian  literature, 
and  by  no  means  the  first  quotation  from  the  Gospel 
according  to  St.  John,  but  yet  the  first  which  names 
St.  John  expressly  as  the  author  ;  and  three  volumes, 
an  Apology  to  the  Riders,  and  controversial  works 
Against  the  Greeks  and  Against  the  Jeivs,  respectively, 
of  an  Asiatic  writer,  Miltiades,  of  whom  no  trace 
remains,  but  who  had  great  reputation  in  his  day. 
The  same  three  titles  which  are  ascribed  to  Miltiades 
are  given  also  to  books  written  by  Claudius  Apoli- 
narius  (this  seems  to  be  the  best  authorized  of  three 
different  spellings  of  his  name),  who  was  bishop  of 
the  Phrygian  city  of  Hierapolis,  and  who  is  quoted 
by  Eusebius  as  an  authority  for  the  famous  story  of 
the  "  Thundering  Legion." 

Here  we  have  a  curious  bit  of  second  century  his* 
K 


162  The  Post- Apostolic  A<je. 

tory,  which,  when  divested  of  legendary  additions, 
amounts  to  this.  In  the  year  174  Marcus  Aurelius 
was  personally  in  command  of  a  Roman  army  fight- 
ing against  the  Quadi,  a  warlike  people  somewhere 
in  the  valley  of  the  Danube.  There  came  a  pro- 
longed drought,  the  army  suffered  terribly  from 
thirst,  the  horses  and  mules  were  near  to  perishing, 
and  a  cloud  of  foes  hovered  near,  threatening  an 
overwhelming  assault.  In  this  emergency  the  Em- 
peror offered  public  prayers  to  Jupiter,  and  a  con- 
siderable body  of  Christian  soldiers  in  the  12th,  or 
Melitene,  Legion  also  prayed  earnestly  for  deliver- 
ance. Clouds  gathered  swiftly  over  what  had  been 
a  clear  sky,  rain  poured  down  accompanied  by  a 
storm  of  hail  with  thunder  and  lightning,  the  Roman 
arms  were  saved  from  appalling  disaster,  and  the 
enemy  were  discomfited.  The  heathen  Emperor  and 
his  Christian  soldiers  claimed  each  with  equal  hon- 
esty, that  a  miracle  had  been  wrought  for  them. 
Eusebius  quotes  Claudius  Apolinarius  as  saying 
that  the  Emperor  gave  the  name  of  "  Thundering 
Legion  "  to  the  Legion  of  Melitene  from  that  day. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Legion  had  had  its  peculiar 
name,  not  Fulminatrix  as  in  later  forms  of  the  story, 
but  Fulminata,  meaning  probably  that  they  carried 
thunderbolts  on  their  standards  as  a  regimental 
badge,  for  more  than  a  hundred  years  before.  Per- 
haps Claudius  said  that  from  that  time  they  bore  the 
title  fitly,  or  some  such  thing,  and  Eusebius  mis- 
understood. Perhaps  Claudius  fell  into  a  blunder 
himself.  At  any  rate  a  remarkable  thing  happened. 
All   parties    thought    the    deliverance    miraculous. 


The  Persecution  of  Lyons  and   Vienne.       163 

Heathen  writers  tell  of  it  as  well  as  Christians. 
Both  boast  of  it.  Only  in  later  years  the  Christian 
story  grew,  till  it  made  the  Legion  to  consist  wholly 
of  Christians,  and  represented  Marcus  as  begging  their 
help,  and  finally  invented  a  letter  from  the  Emperor, 
forbidding  all  further  persecution  of  Christians 
under  his  rule  !  But  no  !  neither  protests  nor  provi- 
dences could  touch  the  conscience  of  the  most  con- 
scientious of  all  the  Roman  emperors,  when  it  came 
to  be  a  matter  of  justice  to  the  Christian  name.  His 
admirable  reign  brought  on  the  darkest  day  that  the 
Church  had  yet  seen.  Persecution  was  rife,  prob- 
ably, throughout  the  empire.  The  one  vivid  picture 
that  has  been  preserved  to  us  comes  from  southern 
Gaul,  from  the  cities  of  Lugdunum  and  Vienna, 
now  known  as  Lyons  and  Vienne. 

These  cities  had  been  colonized  largely  from 
western  Asia  Minor.  They  still  drew  on  that  region 
for  many  immigrants.  Their  business  connections 
were  with  Ephesus  and  Smyrna  and  the  neighbor 
cities.  Their  language  was  Greek.  Their  thought 
and  feeling  were  of  the  East  rather  than  of  the  West. 
Of  nine  martyrs  mentioned  by  name  in  the  story  of 
this  persecution,  Attalus  is  a  man  from  Pergamus,  in 
the  Roman  province  of  Asia,  and  Alexander,  the 
physician,  is  described  as  a  Phrygian.  Irenasus,  who 
succeeds  the  martyred  bishop,  Pothinus,  in  his  dan- 
gerous dignity,  is  another  Asiatic,  having  lived  as  a 
youth  at  Smyrna,  and  been  a  pupil  of  the  blessed 
Polycarp.  So  it  came  to  pass  that  when  the  storm  of 
persecution  fell  heavily  on  these  two  Churches,  in  the 
year  177,  and  love  and  sorrow  and  pride  and  anxious 


164  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

fears  were  raised  to  the  highest  tension,  they  remem- 
bered loving  friends  in  a  far  country  and  addressed 
to  them  a  really  wonderful  letter,  from  which 
Eusebius  has  happily  preserved  large  extracts  in  his 
history. 

"  The  servants  of  Christ  sojourning  at  Vienne  and 
Lyons  in  Gaul,  to  the  brethren  throughout  Asia  and 
Phrygia,  who  hold  the  same  faith  and  hope  of  re- 
demption, peace  and  grace  and  glory  " — mark  the 
trumpet-call  of  that  last  word  !  When  any  Christian 
might  any  day  be  called  to  be  a  martyr,  "glory  "  was 
a  familiar  attribute  of  the  Christian  life — "  from  God 
the  Father  and  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord."  From  this 
beginning  the  writers  go  on  to  tell  a  story  of  suffering 
which  they  declare  expressly  to  be  beyond  the  power 
of  words  to  tell  in  all  its  fulness.  "  With  all  his 
might  the  Adversary  fell  upon  us,"  they  say.  The 
personality  and  power  of  Satan  were  vivid  to  their 
intense  faith  in  God's  revelation  of  the  invisible 
world.  The  method  which  the  prince  of  this  world 
employed  against  God's  people  was  first  the  stirring 
up  of  popular  prejudice.  The  houses  of  the  heathen 
began  to  be  closed  against  persons  known  to  be 
Christians.  Then  Christians  were  excluded  from  the 
baths  and  the  markets.  It  began  to  be  unsafe  for  a 
Christian  to  be  seen  anywhere  abroad.  Mob  violence 
arose  against  the  hated  sect.  They  were  j^elled  after, 
they  were  beaten,  they  were  dragged  in  the  dirt,  they 
suffered  the  spoiling  of  their  goods,  they  were  stoned, 
they  were  made  prisoners  in  their  own  houses.  Then 
the  officers  of  the  law  thought  ifc  time  to  interfere, 
but  only  to  deepen  the  misery  of  the  victims,  and  to 


Vettius  Becomes  a  Paraclete  of  the   Christians.  165 

gratify  the  mob.  A  number  of  persons  were  arrested 
by  the  city  authorities  of  Lyons,  and  held  for  trial 
before  the  governor  of  the  province,  who  was  about 
to  hold  his  court  there.  Their  examination  by  the 
governor  was  so  cruel  and  unfair  that  a  young  man, 
Vettius  Epagathus,  who,  though  an  earnest  Christian, 
had  somehow  escaped  arrest,  arose  and  asked  permis- 
sion to  be  heard  as  a  witness  that  atheism  and  irre- 
ligion  were  groundless  charges  against  Christianity. 
The  only  answer  was  an  enquiry  if  he  was  a  Chris- 
tian. On  his  acknowledgment  that  he  was,  he  was 
taken  into  the  order  of  the  martyrs,  "  being  pleased 
to  lay  down  his  life  for  his  brethren."  It  sounds  as 
if  he  was  ordered  to  immediate  execution.  If  a 
Roman  citizen,  he  could  not  have  been  tortured  law- 
fully, nor  submitted  to  any  worse  form  of  death  than 
beheading.  If  a  Roman  citizen  of  high  social  stand- 
ing, he  would  pretty  certainly  have  had  his  legal 
rights  respected.  He  was  probably  made  an  ex- 
ample of  at  once.  The  letter  says  that  though 
young,  he  had  such  a  reputation  as  that  elder, 
Zacharias,  who  walked  in  all  the  commandments 
and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  blameless,  and  speaks  of 
him  as  called  "  the  paraclete  1  of  the  Christians,"  but 
as  having  in  himself  the  Paraclete,  which  is  the 
Holy  Ghost,  more  abundantly  than  Zacharias  him- 
self. 

Then  there  began  to  be  a  sifting.     About  ten  of 

1  Paraclete  represents  in  English  letters  the  word  rendered 
"Comforter,"  in  St.  John  xiv.  16,  26,  and  "Advocate,"  in  1  St. 
John  ii.  1.  The  true  meaning  of  the  word  is  "  one  called  to 
help,"  or  as  we  may  put  it,  "  a  friend  in  need."  Such  a  person  is 
often  a  comforter,  hut  the  word  never  means  "comforter." 


166  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  prisoners  apostatized.  "  They  proved  abortions," 
in  the  quaint  language  of  the  letter.  The  zeal  of 
the  persecutors  was  inflamed.  Arrests  multiplied 
both  in  Lyons  and  in  Vienne,  till  "all  the  zealous 
persons,  and  those  through  whom  especially  our  con- 
ditions had  been  shaped,  were  gathered  in."  This 
must,  of  course,  be  an  exaggeration,  born  of  love  and 
humility.  Those  that  had  not  been  arrested  kept 
visiting  the  martyrs,  we  had  been  told  before.  Even 
if  these  bold  visitors  were  now  swept  in,  there  was 
zeal  left  in  the  two  Churches,  as  this  very  letter 
shows.  Yet  the  proportion  of  loss  must  have  been 
very  terrible.  How  many  suffered,  Eusebius  does 
not  tell  us,  but  he  does  say  that  a  catalogue  of  all  the 
martyrs  could  be  found  in  this  letter,  but  he  would 
not  copy  it.  Why?  Obviously,  because  it  was  too 
long,  and  contained  too  many  names  of  which  noth- 
ing else  was  known.  Those  named  in  the  progress 
of  the  story  were  but  a  small  part  of  the  whole  num- 
ber. Gregory  of  Tours,  writing  his  book,  On  the 
Glory  of  the  Martyrs,  400  years  after  these  events, 
says  that  there  were  forty-eight,  and  names  forty- 
five.  That  he  got  his  information  from  a  full  copy  of 
this  letter,  and  that  this  statement  is  correct  seems 
altogether  probable.  Forty-eight  is  not  a  great  num- 
ber in  one  view,  but  fort}^-eight  going  to  death 
through  unutterable  horrors  of  torture  out  of  two 
Churches,  which  can  hardly  be  supposed  to  have 
numbered  together  more  than  a  thousand  souls, 
when  one  considers  how  the  writers  speak  as  if  all 
their  leadership  had  been  taken  away, — such  a  loss  of 
one  in  twenty,  or  even   a  greater  proportion  than 


Martyrdom  is    Witness-Bearing .  167 

that,  and  those  among  the  best  and  strongest  in  the 
Christian  community,  was  an  experience  more  appall- 
ing than  it  is  easy  for  us  to  conceive. 

The  horror  deepened.  Heathen  slaves,  in  fear  of 
torture,  testified  to  all  the  worst  things  that  they 
had  ever  heard  concerning  Christians, — cannibal 
feasts,  incests,  promiscuous  and  shameful  immo- 
ralities,— till  "all  the  people  raged  like  wild  beasts 
against  us,  so  that  even  if  any  had  before  been 
moderate  on  account  of  friendship,  they  were  now 
exceedingly  furious,  and  gnashed  their  teeth  against 
us.  And  that  which  was  spoken  by  our  Lord  was 
fulfilled  :  The  time  will  come  when  whosoever  killeth 
you,  will  think  that  he  doeth  God  service." 

Probably  almost  the  whole  heathen  population 
believed  these  testimonies  to  be  true.  Some  good 
men — Marcus  Aurelius  himself  was  one — thought 
that  the  world  was  growing  more  and  more  corrupt, 
that  a  rising  tide  of  vileness  threatened  the  destruction 
of  social  order  and  of  all  that  could  be  called  civi- 
lization among  men,  and  that  this  strange  and  obscure 
phenomenon  of  Christianity  was  one  of  the  very 
worst  symptoms  of  these  evil  days.  To  meet  such  a 
passionate  prejudice  of  sincere  and  upright  men,  our 
Lord  needed  a  great  testimony  for  His  cause.  He 
had  it.  The  word  "  martyr  "  is  our  way  of  writing 
the  Greek  word  for  "a  witness."  The  Greek  word 
had  not  in  those  days  any  such  technical  meaning 
as  "martyr"  has  now.  But  the  Church  took  it  up 
and  applied  it  in  a  way  that  soon  made  it  technical, 
because  the  Church  saw  so  plainly  that  suffering  for 
Christ  in  this  fashion  was  a  magnificent  testimony  in 


168  The  Post-Apostolic  Aye. 

behalf  of  Christ.  The  first  "witness"  named  in  this 
story  is  a  woman,  Blandina, — a  woman,  and  weak, 
and  a  slave.  The  persecutors  put  her  forward  as  an 
easy  prey.  Her  Christian  mistress,  who  also  suffered 
in  this  trial,  feared  for  her  and  could  not  see  how 
she  could  hold  out.  She  was  tortured  "  from  morn- 
ing till  evening  in  every  manner."  "  Her  entire  body 
was  mangled  and  broken."  The  persecutors  said 
that  anyone  of  her  various  agonies  should  have  been 
enough  to  destroy  life.  "But  the  blessed  woman, 
like  an  athlete,  renewed  her  strength  in  her  con- 
fession." Her  comfort  and  relief  was  in  repeating 
this  one  cry  :  /  am  a  Christian,  and  there  is  nothing 
vile  done  by  us. 

The  deacon,  Sanctus,  "endured  superhumanly." 
He  would  not  give  his  name,  his  nationality,  his 
residence,  his  condition  as  slave  or  freeman.  Only 
one  phrase  could  be  wrung  from  him,  "  I  am  a 
Christian."  Ingenuity  itself  was  racked  to  find 
tortures  for  him,  and  finally  red-hot  plates  were 
fixed  to  the  tenderest  parts  of  his  body.  "And 
these  indeed  were  burned,"  the  story  goes  on,  "  but 
he  continued  unbending  and  unyielding,  firm  in  his 
confession,  and  refreshed  and  strengthened  by  the 
heavenly  fountain  of  the  water  of  life,  flowing  from 
the  bowels  of  Christ.  And  his  body  was  a  witness 
for  his  sufferings,  being  one  whole  wound  and  bruise, 
drawn  out  of  shape,  and  altogether  unlike  a  human 
form.  Christ  suffering  in  him  manifested  His  glory, 
delivering  him  from  his  adversary,  and  making  him 
an  example  for  the  others,  showing  that  nothing  is 
fearful  where  the  love  of  the  Father  is,  and  nothing 


Christian  Endurance  a  Puzzle  to  the  Heathen.    169 

painful  where  there  is  the  glory  of  Christ."  The 
same  martyr  was  brought  back  to  the  arena  a  few 
days  later,  in  the  expectation  that  with  his  body  in 
such  an  awful  state  he  must  at  the  least  touch  of 
further  tortures  give  up  his  resolution  or  his  life. 
To  the  general  amazement,  he  rose  up  in  renewed 
strength,  and  even  the  natural  appearance  of  his  tor- 
tured body  was  in  some  measure  restored,  as  if  his 
renewed  sufferings  were  a  healing  rather  than  a 
hurt. 

Such  endurance  was  set  down,  of  course,  to 
"  obstinacy."  Yet  thoughtful  observers  must  have 
felt  that  that  was  an  explanation  which  did  not  ex- 
plain. There  was  a  power  at  work  in  these  people, 
a  marvellous  power,  and  what  might  that  power  be  ? 
And  why  again  did  such  persons  so  firmly  repel  the 
charge  of  evil  deeds  which  all  Christians  were  sup- 
posed to  do,  when  certainly  torture  was  as  nothing 
to  them,  and  not  for  life  or  any  deliverance  would 
they  give  up  the  Christian  name?  Here  was  one  of 
the  puzzling  cases.  A  woman,  Biblias,  had  shown 
herself  weaker  than  these  people  generally  were. 
She  had  publicly  denied  Christ.  There  was  hope  of 
getting  valuable  information  from  her,  and  she  was 
brought  back  to  the  arena  and  tortured  again,  to  get 
from  her  a  confession  of  Christian  crimes  and  deeds 
of  darkness.  "  But  she  recovered  herself  under  the 
suffering,"  says  the  letter, "  and  as  if  awaking  from 
a  deep  sleep,  and  reminded  by  the  present  anguish 
of  the  eternal  punishment  in  hell,  she  contradicted 
the  blasphemers.  '  How! '  she  said,  *  could  those  eat 
children,  who  do  not  think  it  lawful  to  eat  blood 


170  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

even  of  irrational  animals?'1  And  thenceforward 
she  confessed  herself  a  Christian,  and  was  given  a 
place  in  the  order  of  the  martyrs." 

But  the  testimony  of  Christ's  "  witnesses  "  had  to 
be  heeded,  if  it  was  to  be  effective,  and  for  the  time 
it  fell  upon  deaf  ears.  The  prison  was  kept  so 
crowded  with  victims  that  many  died  by  suffocation 
or  by  prison  fevers.  Among  these  victims  was  Po- 
thinus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  a  man  of  over  ninety  years, 
a  great  sufferer  from  asthma,  and  very  infirm. 
Brought  before  the  governor  and  required  to  tell 
what  God  the  Christians  worshipped,  he  made  no 
other  answer  but  this, — "If  thou  art  worthy,  thou 
shalt  know."  Then  he  was  hurried  away  to  the 
prison,  under  a  shower  of  blows  and  missiles  from 
an  angry  mob,  and  after  two  days,  during  which  he 
could  scarcely  breathe  in  that  terrible  atmosphere,  he 
was  taken  to  his  rest.  A  boy  named  Pontius  became 
a  martyr  at  the  age  of  fifteen.  Attalus  of  Pergamos, 
a  man  of  distinction  and  of  Roman  citizenship,  was 
submitted  to  the  torture  of  the  iron  chair,  and  while 
the  fumes  of  his  roasting  flesh  arose  in  the  arena,  he 
cried  in  the  Latin  tongue,  for  the  common  people  to 
understand,  "  Lo !  this  which  ye  do  is  devouring 
men,  but  we  do  not  devour  men,  nor  do  any  other 
wicked  thing."  Space  fails  to  tell  even  what  lias 
been  preserved  to  us  of  this  marvellous  story.  It 
closes,  as  regards  the  record  of  triumphant  deaths, 
with  a  further  mention  of  the  noble  slave-woman, 
Blandina.     She,  for  whom  the  brethren  had  feared, 

1  The  allusion  is,  of  course,  to  the  prohibition  of  "blood" 
mentioned  in  Acts  xv.  20,  29. 


Sigris   Following  Them  That  Believe.        171 

seems  to  have  been  preserved  beyond  them  all,  a 
monument  of  the  power  of  God.  She  had  been 
hung  on  a  stake  in  a  kind  of  crucifixion,  and  thus 
exposed  to  wild  beasts,  she  had  been  scourged,  she 
had  sat  in  the  iron  chair,  she  had  been  enclosed  in  a 
net  to  be  tossed  by  a  wild  bull,  and  still  she  lived 
invincible,  till  the  executioner  was  ordered  to  stab 
her  and  give  her  her  release.  The  whole  story  was 
written  by  eyewitnesses,  and  though  written  under 
the  stress  of  strong  emotion,  it  seems  to  be  perfectly 
simple  and  straightforward.  It  has  the  ring  of 
truth.  But  if  it  be  true,  it  witnesses  to  the  presence 
of  supernatural  power.  The  more  one  reads  the 
storjr,  the  more  one  is  shut  up  to  these  alternatives, 
— either  this  simple-seeming  narrative  is  exaggerated 
out  of  all  resemblance  to  the  truth,  or  these  were 
miracles  of  human  endurance  as  marvellous  as  the 
raising  of  the  dead  to  life.  One  hundred  and  fifty 
years  after  Jesus  Christ  had  ascended  into  heaven, 
signs  most  wonderful  were  following  them  that  be- 
lieved. 

Two  special  features  must  be  noted  here,  which 
make  this  the  sweetest  and  finest  of  all  the  martyr- 
stories  of  the  church.  The  first  is  the  humility  of 
the  martyrs.  "  They  were  also  so  zealous  in  their 
imitation  of  Christ, — ivho  being  in  the  form  of  God, 
counted  not  the  being  equal  with  God  a  thing  to  be 
grasped  at, — that  though  they  had  attained  such 
honor,  and  had  born  witness,  not  once,  or  twice,  but 
many  times,  having  been  brought  back  to  prison 
from  the  wild-beasts,  covered  with  burns  and  scars 
and  wounds,    yet  they  did  not  proclaim  themselves 


172  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

witnesses,  neither  did  they  suffer  us  to  address  them 
by  this  name.  If  any  one  of  us,  in  letter  or  conver- 
sation, spoke  of  them  as  witnesses,  they  rebuked 
him  sharply.  For  they  conceded  cheerfully  the  ap- 
pellation of  Witness  to  Christ,  the  faithful  and  true 
Witness,  and  Firstborn  of  the  dead  and  Prince  of  the 
life  of  God ;  and  they  reminded  us  of  the  witnesses 
who  had  already  departed,  and  said,  '  They  are  al- 
ready witnesses,  whom  Christ  has  deemed  worthy  to 
be  taken  up  in  their  confession,  having  sealed  their 
witness  by  their  departure,  but  we  are  lowly  and 
humble  confessors/  And  they  besought  the  breth- 
ren with  tears,  that  earnest  prayers  should  be  of- 
fered that  they  might  be  perfected." 

The  second  special  characteristic  of  this  story  is 
the  natural  counterpart  of  the  first.  With  the  hu- 
mility of  these  martyrs  goes  their  charity.  Some  who 
had  suffered  less  than  they,  had  denied  and  blas- 
phemed Christ.  Such  were  fellow  prisoners  with 
them  still.  Their  attitude  towards  these  so  pitifully 
lost  souls  was  singularly  Christlike.  "  They  did  not 
boast  over  the  fallen,  but  helped  them  in  their 
need  with  those  things  in  which  they  themselves 
abounded,"— the  reference  is  probably  to  food  and 
comforts  supplied  to  them  by  friends  outside  the 
prison — "having  the  compassion  of  a  mother,  and  shed- 
ding many  tears  on  their  account  before  the  Father." 
They  had  their  rich  reward  in  seeing  some  of  these 
unfortunates  restored  to  the  Christian  life,  and  go- 
ing by  the  passage  of  a  faithful  death  into  Paradise. 
"  They  asked  for  life,"  says  the  record,  "  and  He 
gave  it  to  them,  and  they  shared  it  with  their  neigh- 


Persecution  Followed  by  Reaction.  173 

bors.  Victorious  over  everything,  they  departed  to 
God,  leaving  no  sorrow  to  their  mother,  nor  division, 
nor  strife,  to  their  brethren,  but  joy  and  peace  and 
concord  and  love."  Eusebius,  writing  150  years 
later,  feeling  obliged  to  call  special  attention  to  this 
touching  record  because  of  its  contrast  with  what  he 
calls  "  the  inhuman  and  unmerciful  disposition  "  of 
some  rigid  Christians  in  the  next  century. 

Here  we  must  leave  for  the  present  the  story  of 
the  Church's  conflict  with  persecuting  earthly  pow- 
ers. After  every  great  persecution  there  came  a  re- 
action on  the  part  of  the  imperial  authorities,  and 
probably  in  the  popular  feeling  as  well.  A  good 
many  people  would  get  to  be  shaken  as  to  the  justice 
of  all  this  agony  and  slaughter.  A  wave  of  irreso- 
lution would  sweep  over  the  public  mind,  and  would 
make  itself  felt  in  the  movements  of  official  policy. 
The  reign  of  Commodus,  A.  D.  180-193,  was  thus  a 
time  of  quiet  for  the  Church.  In  fact,  the  Emperor 
had  no  moral  sense  sufficient  to  give  him  any  con- 
cern whether  Christians  were  good  or  bad,  so  long  as 
they  did  not  seem  to  be  political  revolutionaries, 
and  his  concubine,  Marcia,  who  had  much  influence 
with  him,  had  somehow  learned  a  respect  and  kind- 
ness for  Christian  teachers.  The  reign  of  Severus, 
A.  D.  193-211, — this  is  Lucius  Septimius  Severus,  to 
be  distinguished  from  Alexander  Severus,  a  friend  of 
Christians,  reigning  A.  D.  222-235 — will  see  a  re- 
newal of  persecution,  but  the  conditions  of  the 
Church  will  be  different  enough  to  require  the  later 
history  to  be  treated  by  itself.  The  difference  may 
be  said  to  be  this, — the  age  of  the  apologists  is  now 


174  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

over.  There  will  be  more  apologies  and  new  apolo- 
gists, and  some  particularly  great  ones,  but  apolo- 
getic writings  will  no  longer  be  the  chief  work  of 
the  Church's  literary  men.  Christianity  has  become 
strong  enough  in  this  awful  conflict  to  gather  a  mul- 
titude of  followers  which  needs  strong  guiding  by 
wise  teaching,  and  it  has  also  gained  power  to  pro- 
duce such  teaching.  When  a  historian  divides  his 
story  into  clearly  marked  periods  with  telling  titles, 
it  may  generally  be  said  that  the  more  interesting 
his  descriptions,  the  less  closely  accurate  they  are. 
Nevertheless,  one  may  get  some  value  out  of  such  a 
division  of  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  as  this : 

I.  The  Period  of  Organization  (A.  D.  75-125); 

II.  The  Period  of  Apologists  (A.  D.  125-180)  ; 

III.  The  Period  of  Theological  Teachers  (A.  D. 
180-313). 

But  before  we  pass  to  the  work  of  men  who 
were  before  all  things  else  great  Christian  Teachers, 
and  to  the  rise  of  recognized  Schools  of  Christian 
Learning,  we  must  give  attention  to  some  other  con- 
ditions of  the  Church's  struggle  in  this  same  Period 
of  Apologists  which  we  have  been  passing  in  review. 
We  have  to  consider  certain  perversions  of  Chris- 
tianity, which  figured  as  rivals  of  the  Catholic 
Church  in  this  period  and  afterwards,  and  certain 
controversies  which  troubled  the  Church  within. 
Though  some  of  these  subjects  belong  quite  as  much 
to  the  following  period  as  to  this,  it  will  be  conven- 
ient to  speak  of  them  all  before  going  farther  with 
the  study  of  the  main  line  of  the  Church's  develop- 
ment. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE   CHURCH'S  RIVALS  :    EBIONISM  AND  GNOSTICISM. 

HEN  a  new  idea  is  presented  to  a  man's 
mind,  especially  a  religions  idea,  the  man 
is  not  likely  to  receive  it  unless  he  can 
make  it  fit  with  what  he  has  been  in  the 
habit  of  thinking,  with  what  he  has  been 
particularly  sure  of  and  interested  in,  in  the  time 
past  of  his  life.  Most  men's  convictions  cannot  be 
changed  rapidly,  in  any  way  that  can  be  called  pro- 
found, at  least,  because  if  God  gives  them  any  new 
revelation  remote  from  the  belief  which  they  have 
formerly  cherished,  they  will  color  the  new  revela- 
tion very  deeply  from  the  hue  of  their  former 
thoughts,  and  much  reshape  it  by  pouring  it  into  the 
mould  of  their  own  prejudices.  That  is  what  hap- 
pened with  the  Christian  Gospel  in  many  men's  re- 
ception of  it.     It  could  not  be  otherwise. 

When  the  Word  of  God  was  made  flesh,  and  be- 
gan thus  to  make  God  known  to  men  in  a  new 
order,  that  Divine  Word,  our  Saviour,  had  one  great 
help  for  His  work,  and  one  great  difficulty,  from  the 
existing  conditions  of  human  thought.  The  help 
came  from  the  fact  that  the  Roman  Empire  was  in  a 
state  of  religious  unrest.  There  was  a  hunger  in 
many  men's  hearts  for  something  better  in  the  way 
of  religion  than   they  had.     The   Jew  was  looking 

175 


176  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

eagerly  for  a  Messiah  and  for  a  world-wide  kingdom 
of  righteousness.  The  heathen  man  wanted  to  find 
some  god  whom  he  could  respect  and  love  as  well  as 
fear.  Old  religious  conditions  were  felt  to  be  un- 
satisfactory. The  time  was  ripe  for  something  new. 
The  difficulty  came  in  the  fact  that  the  new  thing 
which  God  actually  had  to  give  was  in  some  ways 
surprisingly  different  from  anything  that  men  had 
begun  to  look  for,  and  in  some  ways  positively  an- 
tagonistic to  their  natural  ideas.  To  the  Jew  the  Mo- 
saic system,  with  its  Temple,  its  ministry,  its  sacrifices, 
its  circumcision,  its  Sabbaths,  was  the  essential  em- 
bodiment of  religion.  It  was  a  terrible  shock  to  be 
asked  to  conceive  of  the  service  of  God  as  going  on 
acceptably  with  all  these  things  left  out  of  it.  To 
the  heathen  man,  deeply  and  awfully  impressed  with 
the  conflict  of  good  and  evil  forces  in  the  world's 
life,  it  was  perhaps  as  severe  a  trial  to  be  asked  to 
believe  that  the  whole  created  universe,  the  whole 
tangle  of  good  and  bad,  was  the  work  of  one  Being, 
a  good  God  and  Father,  loving  and  wise  and  al- 
mighty. Many,  therefore,  both  of  Jews  and  heathen, 
accepted  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ  as  somehow 
representing  a  revelation  from  the  true  God,  but 
proceeded  to  work  it  over  till  they  had  made  an- 
other thing  of  it,  correcting  the  divine  message  by 
their  own  prepossessions,  rather  than  giving  up  their 
prepossessions  to  be  corrected  by  the  divine  message. 
Judaism  and  heathenism  furnished  each  its  own 
characteristic  perversions  of  the  Christian  Gospel, 
setting  up  in  each  case  a  rival  message  and  a  rival 
Church,  or  rather  Churches,  for  the  more  popular  any 


Ebionism^  the  Jews1  Distortion  of  Christianity.     177 

one  of  these  false  Gospels  was  found  to  be,  the  more 
numerously  it  multiplied  into  petty  sects. 

1.  Ebionism.  The  Jewish  perversion  of  Christi- 
anity took  its  name  from  Ebion,  the  Hebrew  word 
for  poor.  Later  Christian  explanations  dwelt  upon 
the  "  poor  "  notions  concerning  our  Lord  which  were 
entertained  by  Ebionite  believers,  or  on  their  "  pov- 
erty of  intellect,"  or  even  guessed  at  a  founder 
named  with  this  name.  Some  among  modern  schol- 
ars have  thought  that  "the  poor"  might  have  been 
a  contemptuous  designation  of  early  Christian  be- 
lievers generally  in  Jewish  circles,  the  Gospel  mak- 
ing its  way  so  much  faster  among  the  poor  than 
among  the  rich  as  to  give  opportunity  for  such  a 
sneer.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt,  however, 
that  this  title  was  one  which  the  members  of  the 
sect  assumed  to  themselves,  and  a  word  of  pride  of 
that  very  common  kind,  "the  pride  which  apes  hu- 
mility." The  Hebrew  prophets  dwell  much  on 
God's  love  and  care  for  the  poor.  Take,  for  ex- 
ample, the  splendid  Messianic  prophecy  of  the 
seventy-second  Psalm.  It  is  particularly  concerned 
all  through  with  the  poor,  the  needy,  the  oppressed. 
Nothing  more  natural,  then,  and  nothing  more  arro- 
gant, than  for  a  little  sect  of  peculiar  opinions  to 
take  to  themselves  this  really  great  title  of  "  God's 
poor."1  One  may  guess  that  in  the  case  of  these 
Hebrew  improvers  of  Christianity  the  choice  of  such 
a  designation  implied  a  sorrowful  recognition  of  the 

1One  may  compare  the  very  similar  name  of  the  mediaeval  sect 
of  the  Waldenses  who  preferred  to  be  called  "The  Poor  Men  of 
Lyons." 


178  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

downfall  of  their  nation  as  a  secular  power.  So  far 
these  half-converts  were  ready  to  accept  the  inevi- 
table. They  acknowledged  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the 
Messiah,  and  they  recognized  the  fact  that  His  King- 
dom was  to  be  a  kingdom  "not  of  this  world."  But 
God's  Kingdom  could  not  be  a  disloyal  kingdom. 
The  poor  of  God  must  obey  the  law  of  God.  That, 
to  the  Ebionite  believers,  meant  the  law  of  Moses. 
They  were  the  followers  of  those  who  are  mentioned 
in  Acts  xv.  1,  as  teaching  the  brethren,  "  Except 
ye  be  circumcised  after  the  manner  of  Moses,  ye  can- 
not be  saved."  In  the  Apostolic  Age  the  Church 
was  torn  in  twain  by  the  contentions  of  two  parties, 
the  party  of  subjection  to  the  Mosaic  system,  and 
the  party  of  freedom  from  it.  Now  the  strife  was 
over,  but  not  by  any  reconciliation  of  the  oppos- 
ing parties.  Ebionism  had  become  a  rival  religion 
to  Christianity,  and  maintained  a  rival  Church. 

(«)  In  dealing  with  the  parties  or  sects  which 
grew  out  of  the  Ebionite  movement,  it  might  be 
made  to  appear  supremely  unjust  to  begin  with  the 
Nazarenes,  for  they  began  as  a  Christian  party,  not 
sharing  the  Ebionite  temper ;  but  they  passed  over 
into  the  position  of  a  separate  sect  at  last,  and  it  is 
with  this  movement  of  thought  that  they  are  to  be 
connected.  At  first  they  were  simply  Jewish  Chris- 
tians, who  kept  up  such  ancestral  usages  as  cir- 
cumcision and  the  Sabbath,  in  addition  to  the  Sacra- 
ments and  services  of  the  Christian  Church,  and 
while  claiming  the  liberty  to  go  on  doing  as  their 
forefathers  had  done  in  these  matters,  recognized 
cheerfully  the  equal  right  of  any  other  Christians  to 


The  Nazarenes.  179 


do  nothing  of  the  sort.  Beginning,  no  doubt,  in 
Jerusalem,  they  removed,  according  to  our  Lord's 
warning,  when  they  saw  "  Jerusalem  compassed  with 
armies,"  and  took  refuge  in  the  little  town  of  Pella, 
east  of  the  Jordan.  Then,  when  after  the  revolt  of 
Bar  Cochba,  A.  D.  132-135,  other  Christians  went 
back  to  dwell  in  Hadrian's  city  of  iElia  Capitolina 
built  up  out  of  Jerusalem's  ruins,  these  were  too 
tender  of  Jewish  national  feeling  to  go  and  become 
part  of  a  Gentile  Church,  or  live  in  what  was  under- 
stood to  be  henceforth  a  Gentile  city,  but  we  have 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  there  was  any  breach  of 
communion  between  them  and  the  Gentile  bishops 
of  iElia  or  the  Christians  under  their  charge.  A 
curious  book  called  "  The  Testaments  of  the 
Twelve  Patriarchs,"  deathbed  speeches  put  into  the 
mouth  of  Jacob's  sons,  seems  to  be  the  work  of  a 
Nazarene  writer.  If  so,  it  is  the  sole  monument  in 
Christian  literature  of  the  activity  of  this  peculiar 
people.  It  was  probably  written  early  in  the  second 
century,  though  some  date  it  in  the  latter  half.  Its 
dealing  with  the  sins  of  Jacob's  sons  is  marked  by 
a  simplicity  that  sounds  coarse  to  modern  ears,  and 
it  is  not  worth  reading  for  the  ordinary  student,  but 
it  has  a  noteworthy  passage  in  the  Testament  of 
Benjamin,  in  the  form  of  a  glowing  prophecy  of  the 
career  of  St.  Paul.  "  And  I  shall  no  longer  be  called 
a  ravening  wolf,"  it  says,  "on  account  of  your  rav- 
ages, but  a  worker  of  the  Lord,  distributing  good  to 
them  who  work  what  is  good.  And  one  shall  rise 
up  from  my  seed  in  the  latter  times,  beloved  of  the 
Lord,   hearing  upon  earth   His   voice,   enlightening 


180  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

with  new  knowledge  the  Gentiles,  bursting  in  upon 
Israel  with  salvation  with  the  light  of  knowledge, 
and  tearing  it  away  from  it  like  a  wolf,  and  giving  it 
to  the  synagogue  of  the  Gentiles.  And  until  the 
consummation  of  the  ages  shall  he  be  in  the  syna- 
gogues of  the  Gentiles,  and  among  their  rulers,  as  a 
strain  of  music  in  the  mouth  of  all;  and  he  shall  be 
inscribed  in  the  holy  books,  both  his  work  and  his 
word,  and  he  shall  be  a  chosen  one  of  the  Lord  for 
ever;  and  because  of  him  my  father  Jacob  in- 
structed me  saying :  '  He  shall  fill  up  that  which 
lacks  of  thy  tribe.'  " 

The  reference  to  St.  Paul  is  unmistakable,  and  the 
passage  would  seem  to  imply  the  heartiest  accept- 
ance of  Pauline  Christianity.  At  the  same  time  the 
keeping  up  of  a  large  framework  of  religious  habits 
with  which  the  main  body  of  the  Church  was  far  out 
of  sympathy  was  a  hazardous  experiment.  It  tended 
constantly  to  throw  the  Nazarenes  into  the  position 
of  a  separate  sect.  When  Jerome,  who  lived  for 
some  time  in  Palestine  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
fourth  century,  and  who  quotes  with  approval  some 
Nazarene  interpretations  of  Old  Testament  passages, 
describes  them  as  people  who  tried  to  be  both  Jews 
and  Christians,  and  ended  by  being  neither,  he 
seems  to  imply  that  the  experiment  had  already 
failed.  Whether  by  a  gradual  growth  in  the  wrong 
direction  on  their  own  part,  or  by  a  narrow  and 
technical  temper  on  the  part  of  the  rulers  of  the 
Church  in  Palestine,  the  Nazarenes  had  become 
separated  from  the  Catholic  body.  The  lesson  of 
their  history  is  a  warning  against  the  sectarian  spirit. 


The  Pharisaic  Ehionites.  181 

These  Christians  began  with  building  up  on  the 
essential  foundations  of  Christianity  a  large  super- 
structure of  things  innocent  in  themselves,  and  care- 
fully defined  as  non-essentials.  But  though  Chris- 
tians of  a  soundly  Catholic  theory,  the  Nazarenes  did 
in  practice  give  their  love  and  zeal  to  the  non-essen- 
tial traits  of  their  own  party  more  than  to  the  truly 
essential  elements  of  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  the  inevitable  result  was  first  separation  into  a 
rival  Church,  and  then  the  gradual  loss  of  those  very 
fundamentals  of  Christian  doctrine  which  they  had 
once  been  as  ready  as  any  one  to  maintain  inviolate. 

The  Nazarenes  were  never  a  numerous  body,  and 
probably  never  had  any  influence  worth  speaking  of 
upon  the  Church's  growth.  What  their  descendants 
have  come  to  be,  as  a  curious  little  sect  in  Southern 
Babylonia,  with  a  strange  mixture  of  Christian, 
Jewish,  and  heathen  notions,  but  with  nothing  left 
that  could  at  all  be  described  as  Christianity,  may 
be  learned  from  the  Article  Mandceans  in  the  En- 
cyclopedia Britannica. 

(b)  The  Ebionites  proper  parted  into  two  main 
branches.  The  earlier  party  is  that  which  has  come 
to  be  labelled  by  modern  writers  as  Pharisaic  Ebion- 
ites. In  addition  to  the  general  Ebionite  position  of 
unwillingness  to  give  up  the  law  of  Moses  as  any- 
thing less  than  a  law  for  the  whole  world,  these 
stumbled  also  at  the  story  of  the  Virgin  Birth  and  at 
the  idea  of  our  Lord's  Divinity.  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
was  the  Messiah,  doubtless,  but  He  was  born  like 
other  men,  and  it  was  only  at  His  baptism  that  He 
received  an  effusion  of  Divine  Power  which  raised 


182  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

Him  above  the  level  of  other  servants  of  God.  They 
had  a  Hebrew  Gospel,  which  added  to  the  words 
from  heaven  in  the  story  of  the  baptism  the  phrase, 
"  This  day  have  I  begotten  Thee."  This  same  apoc- 
ryphal Gospel  contains  also  a  story  given  as  true  by 
Justin  Martyr, — we  know  not  whence  Justin  received 
it, — that  a  fire  appeared  upon  the  waters  of  the 
Jordan,  when  our  Lord  was  baptized.  The  great 
commentator  Origen  quaintly  compares  these  Ebi- 
onites  to  the  blind  men  just  out  of  Jericho,  who 
could  not  see  our  Lord  as  He  was,  and  called  to 
Him,  "  Have  mercy  upon  us,  O  Lord,  Thou  Son  of 
David."  The  pitiful  difference  is  that  the  blind  men 
by  Jericho  believed  all  that  God  gave  them  to  be- 
lieve, while  to  these  other  blind  men  our  Lord  had 
distinctly  showed  Himself  in  His  claim  to  be  not 
only  Son  of  David,  but  Son  of  God,  and  still  they 
would  not  see.  They  had,  of  course,  a  special  rage 
against  St.  Paul.  It  was  he  above  all  other  men  who 
had  withstood  them  in  their  piratical  attempt  to 
seize  the  Ark  of  Christ's  Church  and  sail  it  away 
under  a  flag  of  heresy  and  hatred,— heresy  as  to  our 
Lord's  Person  and  work,  hatred  of  all  the  world,  so 
far  as  it  would  not  consent  to  bear  the  Jewish 
stamp.  St.  Paul  was  the  very  embodiment  of  evil  in 
their  eyes. 

The  field  of  influence  of  such  a  body  of  believers 
must  have  been  confined  pretty  much  to  men  of 
Jewish  birth.  It  cannot,  in  general,  have  affected 
the  Church's  life  and  growth  in  any  way  beyond 
keeping  back  a  certain  number  of  Jews,  who  might 
but  for  this  half-way  house  have  been  brought  into 


A  Heretic  Does  Great  Service  as  a  Translator.    183 

the  Christian  fellowship  ;  but  it  included  at  least 
one  earnest  soul  who  worked  amid  its  pitiful  dark- 
ness of  delusion  to  do  a  great  service  to  the  King- 
dom of  God.  Towards  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, or  in  the  early  part  of  the  third,  Symmachus, 
an  Ebionite  of  this  order,  produced  a  translation  of 
the  Old  Testament  into  Greek.  Two  such  versions 
had  been  made  already  in  Christian  times,  those  of 
Aquila  and  Theodotion,  both  Jewish  proselytes. 
Jerome,  the  learned  scholar  of  the  fourth  century, 
describes  the  three  versions,  Aquila's  as  following 
the  original  with  slavish  literalness,  Theodotion's  as 
most  scrupulously  careful  not  to  depart  far  from 
older  translations,  and  that  of  Symmachus  as  giving 
the  best  idea  of  the  real  sense  of  Holy  Scripture. 
It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add  that  when  Jerome 
himself  was  translating  the  Bible  into  Latin,  he  was 
profoundly  influenced  in  his  Old  Testament  render- 
ings by  this  Greek  version  of  Symmachus.  Je- 
rome's Latin  became  the  accepted  form  of  the  Scrip- 
tures for  the  whole  Latin-reading  Church,  the 
Editio  Vulgata  (Edition  Commonly  Received),  whence 
our  English  term  "  Vulgate  "  for  the  official  Bible 
of  the  Roman  Communion, — a  version  that  has  in- 
fluenced human  thought  more  profoundly  than  any 
other  that  ever  was  made. l 

1  It  should  be  remembered  that  the  Vulgate  Latin  Version  had 
been  read  and  studied  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  before 
the  King  James  Version,  or  its  Elizabethan  predecessor,  from 
■which  the  Prayer  Book  Version  of  the  Psalms  is  drawn,  or 
Luther's  great  German  Version,  saw  the  light.  Moreover,  the 
influence  of  the  Vulgate  is  felt  profoundly  in  both  the  English 
and  the  German  translations,  so  that  the  influence  of  these  noble 
rivals  of  the  Vulgate  is  partly  an  influence  of  the  Vulgate,  too. 


184  The  Post- Apostolic 


So'  out  of  this  untoward  ground  of  Ebionism 
springs  one,  and  not  the  least  important,  among  the 
many  sources  which  have  gone  to  feed  a  river  of 
life  in  the  knowledge  of  the  true  meaning  of  the 
Scriptures,  which  still  makes  glad  the  City  of  God. 

(c)  Pharisaic  Ebionism  represented  the  extremest 
refusal  of  Judaism  to  accept  any  new  elements  of 
thought  beyond  the  bare  acknowledgment  that  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  was  the  promised  Messiah.  But  Jews 
were  scattered  through  nearly  all  the  countries  of 
the  Roman  Empire,  and  some  of  these  had  gone  a 
step  farther  in  their  mental  development.  They 
could  not  help  being  influenced  by  the  thought  of 
philosophical  heathenism.  Out  of  this  mixture  came 
still  another  growth  that  founded  itself  upon  the 
Christ,  and  yet  was  not  genuine  Christianity.  It 
is  called  by  scholars  Essene  or  Gnostic  Ebionism. 

The  name  Gnostic  implies  the  presence  in  the 
system  of  some  such  elements  drawn  from  heathen 
thought  as  we  shall  see  in  the  corrupted  versions  of 
Christianity  presently  to  be  considered  under  the 
head  of  Gnosticism.  The  name  Essene  is  intended 
to  suggest  the  probable  origin  of  this  sect  from  a 
peculiar  secret  society,  the  Essenes  or  Esseeans, 
which  seems  to  have  had  place  among  the  Jews  of 
Palestine  for  something  like  150  years  before  the 
Coming  of  our  Lord.  Edersheim  gives  a  singularly 
interesting  account  of  them  in  his  Life  and  Times  of 
Jesus  the  Messiah,  Book  III.,  Chap.  ii.  A  very  dif- 
ferent view  of  them  is  given  by  another  great  author- 
ity in  the  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography,  Art. 
Essenes,  and  Bishop  Lightfoot  has  treated  of  them  with 


The   Original  Essene  Society.  185 

large  learning  in  a  dissertation  appended  to  his  vol- 
ume on  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.  They  seem  to 
have  been  very  rigid  Puritans,  reminding  one  of 
early  Quakers  in  some  of  their  habits,  and  of  Shak- 
ers in  others,  for  most  of  the  society  were  bound  to 
a  celibate  life.  Edersheim  derives  their  name  of 
Essenes  from  a  Hebrew  word  meaning  "  Outsiders.  " 
Outsiders  they  certainly  were  in  the  view  of  the 
Jewish  Church.  They  obeyed  the  law  of  Moses 
strictly,  as  they  understood  it,  but  their  under- 
standing was  far  remote  from  the  common  one. 
They  never  ate  the  Passover,  for  they  were  strict 
vegetarians.  They  never  attended  the  Temple  wor- 
ship, though  they  sometimes  sent  thank-offerings  to 
be  offered  there.  Everywhere  they  were  marked  by 
their  white  robes,  the  symbol  of  the  purity  for  which 
they  were  eager,  and  in  pursuit  of  such  purity  they 
held  themselves  aloof  from  all  uninitiated  persons. 
They  lived  in  community,  having  no  individual 
possessions,  and  they  were  bound  by  terrible  oaths 
never  to  touch  food  that  was  not  prepared  by  one  of 
their  own  number,  and  served  at  a  meal  which  was 
a  religious  exercise.  Excommunication  was  recog- 
nized in  their  system,  but  to  the  Essene  to  be  ex- 
communicated from  the  brotherhood  with  its  com- 
mon table  meant  nothing  less  than  death  by  starva- 
tion, as  a  deliverance  of  the  purged  soul  from  the 
offending  body.  That  they  denied  the  resurrection 
of  the  body  is  both  stated  and  again  disputed.  It 
seems  more  probable  that  they  did. 

This  little  society — there  were  about  4,000  of  them 
when  the    Christian    Church  was   young — seems  to 


186  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

have  been  taken  hold  of  by  the  teachings  of  our 
Lord,  and  to  have  seen  in  them  the  opportunity  for 
a  universal  religion.  The  system  which  grew  up 
out  of  their  acceptance  of  our  Lord  as  a  prophet 
aimed  to  clear  Judaism  of  its  elements  most  offen- 
sive to  the  heathen  mind,  while  saving  its  dignified 
monotheism,  its  austere  morality,  and  its  simple 
doctrine  of  the  origin  of  the  universe.  This  Gnos- 
tic Ebionism  declared  nearly  all  historic  Judaism  to 
be  a  corruption  of  the  divine  law.  It  discarded  all 
the  Old  Testament  except  the  Five  Books  of  Moses, 
and  some  portions  even  of  those.  It  taught  that 
animal  sacrifices  had  been  from  the  first  a  misunder- 
standing, and  that  all  references  to  such  things  in 
its  expurgated  Bible  were  to  be  interpreted  allegor- 
ically.  It  divided  the  Old  Testament  heroes  into 
two  classes,  "prophets  of  truth,  "  and  "prophets  of 
understanding,  not  of  truth,  "  meaning,  apparently, 
by  "prophets  of  understanding"  ingenious  corrupt- 
ers of  the  original  religion  of  God's  people.  In  the 
former  class  of  prophets  it  placed  Adam,  Noah, 
Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Aaron,  Moses ;  in  the  lat- 
ter, David  and  Solomon,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  all 
the  writers  of  the  books  which  it  had  rejected. 
The  Gnostic  Ebionites  did  not  receive  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  but  they  held  the  existence  of  two 
vaguely  divine  powers,  a  male  principle,  the  Son  of 
God,  who  had  been  several  times  incarnate,  in  Adam 
first,  and  last  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  a  female  princi- 
ple, the    Holy  Spirit. 1     They  had  what  they  called 

xThe  name  by  which  God  chooses  to  make  known  to  us  the 
Third  Person  in  the  Godhead  is  the  Spirit,  or  Breath,  of  God.    The 


Departures  of  Essenic  Ebionism  from  Essenism.    187 

a  Eucharist,  but  would  not  use  wine  in  it ;  unleav- 
ened bread  and  water  were  its  elements.  Of  bap- 
tisms, or  at  least  of  ceremonial  purifications  with 
water,  they  had  many.  As  has  been  said,  they 
treated  the  religion  of  the  Jewish  Church  as  an 
utter  corruption  of  the  law  of  Moses,  but  they  re- 
garded that  law  in  its  purity  as  a  law  for  the  whole 
world.  Hence  they  were  as  bitter  against  St.  Paul 
for  his  defence  of  Christian  freedom  as  the  most  in- 
tense of  the  Pharisaic  Ebionites  could  be.  They 
continued  the  Essene  tradition  of  condemning  flesh 
food,  but  they  allowed  and  even  commended  mar- 
riage. Another  contradiction  of  the  older  Essene 
idea  was  the  utter  prohibition  of  oaths.  Their  sys- 
tem was  very  much  one  of  mixtures;  baptism  and 
circumcision,  the  Jewish  Sabbath  and  the  Christian 
Lord's  Day,  genuine  revelation  and  the  merest  fan- 
cies of  superstition,  flourished  side  by  side. 

How  much  did  this  movement  affect  the  real  King- 
dom of  God?  It  is  hard  to  say.  Comparatively 
speaking,  Pharisaic  Ebionism  was  stagnant,  and 
Essene  Ebionism  was  active.  Pharisaic  Ebionism 
represented  the  position  of  a  very  small  number  of 
Jews,  who  had  come  to  feel  that  old  religious  con- 
ditions must  suffer  change,  but  who  could  receive 
just  so  much,  and  no  more.  They  were  "  slow  of 
heart."  They  could  not  keep  up  with  the  movement 
of  the  age,  but  they  felt  no  urgency  upon  them  to 
carry  any  message  to  the  great  world,  to  try  to  change 

word  for  "  breath"  in  Hebrew  is  feminine.  Hence  the  notion, 
somewhat  common  among  early  heresies,  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a 
feminine  power. 


188  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

its  course.  With  Essene  Ebionism  it  was  otherwise. 
It  was  distinctly  an  attempt  of  men  who  felt  that 
the  world  needed  one  great,  all-satisfying  religion,  to 
find  the  answer  to  that  need.  They  constructed 
something  that  satisfied  themselves  so  well  that  they 
thought  that  it  was  really  going  to  satisfy  all  mankind. 
Like  many  "  liberal  "  thinkers  of  to-day,  they  thought 
that  they  had  found  those  happily  selected  elements 
of  religion  which  the  heart  of  man  really  craves,  and 
they  held  (rightly  enough)  that  what  satisfies  perma- 
nently and  fully  the  heart  of  man  must  be  true. 
Correspondingly,  they  had  the  missionary  spirit. 
They  wrote  books.  They  went  forth  seeking  con- 
verts. We  know  something  of  two  examples  of  their 
literary  activity. 

(1)  Somewhere  about  A.  D.  222  there  appeared  in 
Rome,  a  Syrian  named  Alcibiades,  who  brought  with 
him  a  work  called  the  Book  of  Mcliesai.  It  professed 
to  contain  a  revelation  from  heaven  as  to  the  means 
whereby  Christians  who  had  fallen  into  sin  after 
their  baptism  could  obtain  forgiveness  and  renewal. 
That  was  a  subject  in  regard  to  which  some  of  the 
leaders  of  the  Roman  Church  were  then  at  deadly 
strife  with  one  another,  and  as  a  means  of  catching 
the  attention  of  all  Christians  nothing  could  have 
been  better  chosen.  But  the  book  was  no-  Christian 
revelation.  It  was  a  product  of  Essenic  Ebionism, 
and  really  the  most  interesting  thing  about  it  is  its 
date.  Its  revelation  purports  to  have  been  given  in 
the  third  year  of  Trajan,  A.  D.  100  or  101.  If  the 
members  of  the  sect  claimed  that  their  ideas  took 
shape  about  the  end  of  the  first  Christian  century,  it 


Danger  that  Men  Will  Locik  for  Grace  Irresistible.  189 

is  obvious  that,  whether  true  or  false,  they  could  not 
be  presented  as  the  religious  teachings  of  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  nor  yet  as  teachings  of  His  original  Apos- 
tles.1 What  made  such  teachings  acceptable  and 
dangerous  at  the  time  when  Alcibiades  brought  the 
book  of  Elchesai  to  Rome,  was  the  fact  that  it  offered 
a  new  salvation  to  men  in  whose  eyes  the  salvation 
of  Jesus  Christ  seemed  to  be  failing.  The  great 
question  of  the  Christian  mind  at  Rome  just  then 
was  the  question  what  could  be  done  with  those  who 
had  denied  Christ  under  persecution,  or  otherwise 
fallen  into  any  deadly  sin,  after  their  baptism. 
Could  such  be  admitted  to  "  renew  them  again  unto 
repentance  "  ?  Or  must  they  be  set  down  as  irre- 
deemable failures  ?  There  is  always  a  danger  that 
where  salvation  from  sin  is  preached,  some  men  will 
think  of  it  as  a  power  so  overwhelming  that  it  raises 
the  soul  above  the  need  of  struggle,  and  carries  it 
beyond  the  danger  of  any  dreadful  fall.  To  men 
who  had  looked  for  a  salvation  so  great  that  a  man 
could  not  possibly  fall  out  of  it,  or  so  narrow  that 
one  who  had  fallen  out  of  it  could  never  lay  hold  on 
it  again,  the  discovery  that  there  were  such  things  as 

1  Some  German  scholars  have  insisted  that  this  form  of  Ebion- 
ism  was  the  religion  of  the  Twelve,  and  that  the  later  Christian- 
ity was  the  invention  of  St.  Paul.  Hegesippus,  the  first  Church 
historian,  was  also  claimed  as  an  Ebionite.  The  foundation  for 
this  lay  in  the  account  of  St.  James  the  Just,  the  first  Bishop 
of  Jerusalem,  as  quoted  by  Eusebius  from  Hegesippus,  which 
simply  represents  him  as  a  very  ascetic  person,  still  obeying  the 
law  of  Moses,  and  going,  as  St.  Paul  himself  used  to  go,  to  the 
Temple  to  worship.  In  like  manner  Clement  of  Alexandria 
speaks  of  St.  Matthew  as  a  strict  vegetarian  and  an  ascetic. 
But  this  only  shows  that  certain  practices  of  the  Essene  society 
were  such  as  were  likely  to  commend  themselves  to  any  very  de- 
vout persons  in  that  age  and  country. 


190  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

apostasies  and  deadly  moral  failures  in  the  Church  of 
Christ  would  be  a  real  trial  of  faith,  and  perhaps  any 
attempted  restoration  of  such,  a  greater  one.  Did 
the  salvation  of  Jesus  really  save  ?  To  men  afflicted 
with  such  doubts  Essenic  Ebionism  offered  its  Hid- 
den Power — such  seems  to  be  the  meaning  of  JElchesai, 
which  is  probably  a  representation  of  two  Syriac 
words — and  a  new  Baptism,  with  the  promise  of  a 
more  victorious  life. 

(2)  It  is  not  likely  that  the  Ebionite  missionaries 
ever  drew  away  much  people  after  them.  Another 
publication  of  theirs,  however,  was  destined  to  affect 
considerably  the  Church's  mind.  In  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  or  the  early  part  of  the  third,  there 
appeared  in  various  forms  as  Clementine  Recognitions , 
or  Itinerary  of  St.  Clement,  or  again  as  Clementine 
Homilies,  a  curious  story,  a  sort  of  religious  novel, 
with  Clement  of  Rome  for  a  hero.  The  foundation 
of  the  tale  was  a  favorite  one  with  story-tellers, — a 
family  consisting  of  father,  mother,  and  sons,  all 
separated  from  one  another  by  various  disasters,  and 
brought  together  again  in  unexpected  "  recogni- 
tions." It  is  the  same  story  which  lies  at  the  base  of 
Shakespeare's  Comedy  of  Errors,  but  in  the  Pseudo- 
Clementines  we  have  one  of  its  dullest  forms.  A 
Roman  gentleman,  Faustus,  sends  his  wife  and  his 
twin  sons,  Faustinus  and  Faustinianus,  to  Athens, 
and  they  are  never  heard  from.  After  ten  years  he 
leaves  his  older  son,  Clement,  in  the  care  of  friends, 
and  goes  on  a  voyage  of  enquiry,  in  which  he  also 
disappears    from    view.     Clement,  grown    to  man's 


The  Pseudo- Clementine  Story.  191 

estate,  and  still  a  heathen,1  hears  of  Christianity 
through  the  preaching  of  St.  Barnabas,  and  is  in- 
duced to  go  to  Palestine  to  seek  instruction  from 
St.  Peter.  He  hears  many  discourses  from  the 
Apostle,  whence  the  title  Homilies  given  to  one  form 
of  the  story,  and  more  especially,  he  is  present  at  a 
series  of  arguments  between  St.  Peter  and  Simon 
Magus.  Clement  meets  an  old  beggar-woman  and 
discovers  her  to  be  his  mother,  who  is  forthwith  con- 
verted and  baptized.  Two  former  disciples  of  Simon 
Magus,  converted  by  St.  Peter,  are  found  to  be 
the  lost  twins,  the  brothers  of  Clement,  and  presently 
the  heathen  father  is  discovered  also,  and  becomes  a 
Christian,  completing  the  family  group. 

The  story  is  not  entertainingly  told,  and  the 
preachings  and  arguments  are  intolerably  dull.  The 
book  has  no  interest  but  in  the  light  which  it  is  able 
to  throw  upon  the  history  of  the  times  in  which  it 
was  written.  Its  first  object  was  to  draw  away  at- 
tention from  St.  Paul,  who  is  never  mentioned  by 
name,  to  those  Apostles  who  were  more  narrowly 
Jewish  in  their  thoughts  and  ways,  and  in  this  con- 
nection we  note  that  it  is  St.  James,  "  the  Lord's 
brother,"  who  is  put  forward  as  the  leader  and 
prince  of  the  Apostolic  company.  "  James,  the  Lord 
and  Bishop  of  Bishops,"  is  his  title.  He  orders 
St.  Peter  to  go  here  and  there,  and  directs  him  to 

1  The  real  Clement  seeras  certainly  to  have  been  of  Jewish 
family  (p.  32).  That  the  Judaizing  writer  of  this  story  did  not 
know  that  fact,  is  a  particularly  curious  circumstance,  and  helps 
to  show  how  little  he  knew  of  Clement  anyhow.  But  plainly  also 
Clement  was  of  obscure  origin.  When  this  story  reached  Rome, 
nobody  there  knew  anything  to  the  contrary  about  the  early  history 
of  so  great  a  mau. 


192  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

report  his  doings  to  him  at  Jerusalem  annually,  and 
more  especially  at  the  end  of  every  seven  years. 
Assuredly  no  such  papal  airs  were  ever  assumed  by 
any  early  Apostle  towards  another  Apostle  older  in 
years  and  service  than  himself;  but  this  heretical  in- 
ventor did  not  expect  that  Christians  would  feel  any 
difficulty  in  reading  of  St.  Peter  as  thus  subordi- 
nated to  that  Apostle  who  happened  to  be  in  local 
charge  of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem,  the  mother  of  all 
Churches.  Nay  though  the  story  was  worked  over 
by  different  hands  for  Christian  use,  and  cleared 
more  and  more  of  un -Catholic  phraseology,  this  rep- 
resentation of  James  as  head  and  governor  of  all  the 
Apostles  appears  in  every  version.  It  was  not  ob- 
jected to  even  at  Rome,  as  infringing  upon  honors 
due  rather  to  Simon  Peter.  However  bad  its  mis- 
takes about  the  first  century  and  St.  James  may 
be,  it  gives  good  proof  that  the  Christian  mind  of 
the  third  century  was  not  deeply  preoccupied  with 
any  corresponding  mistake  about  a  Petrine  primacy. 
If  there  had  been  such,  the  exaltation  of  St.  Peter 
could  have  been  made  to  suit  the  forger's  purpose 
just  as  well  as  the  exaltation  of  St.  James. 

But  of  course  there  was  an  object  in  all  this  exag- 
geration of  St.  James's  leadership,  and  that  object 
was  to  draw  the  attention  of  Christians  from  Saint 
Paul  to  other  guides,  who  might  be  made  to  seem  to 
speak  with  a  different  voice,  with  a  view  to  an  ulti- 
mate attack  on  the  Church's  own  prevailing  theol- 
ogy as  a  Pauline  corruption  of  the  primitive  Gospel-. 
There  is  no  such  attack  in  the  story  itself,  but  there 
are  cautious  steps  towards  it.     Thus  both  the  Recog- 


Ebionite  Warnings  Against  a  False  Apostle.    193 

nitions  and  the  Homilies  represent  the  prince  of  wick- 
edness as  sending  forth  "  Apostles  "  to  deceive,  and 
they  extort  the  faithful  to  shun  "  Apostle,  or  teacher, 
or  prophet,"  who  does  not  first  accurately  compare 
his  preaching  with  that  of  James.  Indeed,  the  Recog- 
nitions warns  men  not  to  look  for  any  prophet  or 
Apostle  besides  the  Twelve.  Again,  both  forms  of 
the  story  have  a  doctrine  of  pairs.  As  evening  is 
followed  by  morning,  so  is  evil  followed  by  good, 
and  every  revelation  from  God  has  regularly  had 
its  Satanic  forerunner.  Cain  and  Abel,  Esau  and 
Jacob,  Pharaoh's  magicians  and  Moses,  are  such 
pairs.  The  tempter  and  the  Son  of  Man  form  an- 
other. Simon  Magus  and  Simon  Peter  are  another. 
These,  it  is  said  in  the  Homilies  (xvii.  17),  are  to  be 
followed  by  a  certain  false  prophet,  and  then,  "  after 
the  removal  of  the  Holy  Place,"  i.  e.,  after  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  there  was  to  be  a  secret 
sending  abroad  of  the  Gospel.  The  false  prophet 
certainly  meant  St.  Paul,  and  the  secret  revelation 
seems  to  point  to  the  Book  of  Elchesai.  In  the  Bee- 
ognitions  (iii.  61)  the  same  pair  appears  in  this  form, 
"the  ninth,  all  nations,  and  he  who  shall  be  sent  to 
sow  the  word  among  the  nations."  It  may  be  that 
some  words  are  lost,  but  pretty  surely  "  all  nations  " 
refers  somehow  to  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  a  Catholic 
Church  generous  enough  to  take  in  all  nations  with- 
out turning  them  into  Jews,  while  "  he  who  shall  be 
sent  to  sow  the  word  among  the  nations  "  is  the  au- 
thor of  the  Book  of  Elchesai  again,  going  among  the 
nations  to  tell  them  the  terms  of  salvation  more 
strictly  and  more  truly. 
M 


194  The  Post- Apostolic  Age.   ' 

The  Homilies  contains  also  a  passage  (xvii.  19) 
where  St.  Paul's  visions  are  plainly  made  a  sub- 
ject of  ridicule  under  cover  of  an  attack  on  Simon 
Magus.  "  If  our  Jesus  appeared  to  you  in  a  vision, 
.  .  .  it  was  as  one  who  is  enraged  with  an  adver- 
sary." "  How  are  we  to  believe  your  word,  when 
you  tell  us  that  He  appeared  to  you  ?  And  how  did 
He  appear  to  you  when  you  entertain  opinions  con- 
trary to  His  teaching?  But  if  you  were  seen  and 
taught  by  Him  and  became  His  Apostle  for  a  single 
hour,  .  .  .  love  His  Apostles,  contend  not  with 
me  who  companied  with  Him."  "  If  you  were  not 
opposed  to  me  (St.  Peter  is  supposed  to  be  the 
speaker),  you  would  not  accuse  me,  .  .  .  as  if 
I  were  evidently  a  person  that  was  condemned." 
This  is  certainly  an  allusion  to  St.  Paul's  resist- 
ing St.  Peter  to  the  face,  "because  he  stood  con- 
demned "  (Revised  Version  of  Gal.  ii.  11).  And  a 
supposed  letter  of  St.  Peter  to  St.  James,  prefixed 
to  the  Homilies,  speaks  of  "the  man  that  is  my 
enemy,"  with  pretty  certainly  the  same  reference. 

And  yet  all  this  anti-Pauline  allusion  was  so  far 
from  obvious  that  a  faithful  Christian  would  not 
necessarily  suspect  that  he  was  reading  a  heterodox 
book.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Clementine  story 
became  exceeding!}-  popular.  A  Christian  editor 
might  occasionally  leave  out  or  modify  a  suspicious- 
looking  passage  in  the  preaching.  Probably  all 
our  copies  have  known  such  tinkerings,  just  as  the 
Church's  most  popular  hymns  are  always  sung  in 
"improved"  versions  nowadays.  But  the  utterly 
fictitious    story    of    St.    Clement's    relations  to  St. 


Effect  of  the  Forgeries  on  Public  Opinion.       195 

Peter  and  St.  James  got  universal  acceptance  in 
the  Church  as  genuine  history.  It  threw  into  al- 
most hopeless  confusion  the  tradition  of  the  succes- 
sion of  the  early  bishops  of  Rome,  for  how,  men 
asked,  could  Linus  and  Anacletus  have  preceded 
Clement,  if  Clement  was  consecrated  bishop  by 
St.  Peter  himself?  It  gave  a  great  impetus  to 
the  tradition, — if,  indeed,  it  did  not  actually  origi- 
nate the  tradition, — that  the  bishops  of  Rome  were 
peculiarly  successors  of  St.  Peter  in  that  see. 
The  Ebionite  forger  never  accomplished  much  of 
what  he  really  set  before  himself,  but  his  false  mark 
is  deeply  impressed  on  the  Church's  thought  with 
consequences  that  remain  even  to  this  day. l 

II.  G?iosticism.  It  has  been  said  that  the  Jewish 
mind  and  the  heathen  mind  had  each  its  characteris- 
tic perversion  of  Christianity.  The  Jewish  world 
was  very  small.  The  heathen  world  was  very 
great.  Naturally  the  heathen  perversion  sur- 
rounded the  Church  much  more  manifoldly,  hin- 
dered the  Church  much  more  gravely,  distracted 
the  Church's  thought  much  more  embarrassingly, 
than   any   Ebionite    movements.      We   do  not  find 

1Iu  recent  years  a  German  scholar  has  pointed  out,  in  a  quarter 
where  it  had  lain  long  unthought  of,  the  oddest  of  all  survivals  of 
the  Clementine  story.  Simon  Magus  became  the  accepted  type  of 
the  magician,  the  man  who  has  dealings  with  evil  spirits,  in  the 
mediaeval  mind.  The  Clementine  legend  represented  Simon  as 
transforming  the  old  man  Faustus  into  his  likeness  at  one  time, 
to  impose  upon  the  people  of  a  certain  city.  Hence  an  inter- 
change of  names,  and  in  the  chief  German  story  of  magic  arts  and 
wonderful  transformations  and  a  pernicious  league  with  the 
powers  of  darkness,  the  magician  gets  to  be  known  as  Dr.  Faus- 
tus. The  Faust-legend  is  really  a  child  of  the  Ebionite  novel,  and 
Faust  himself  is  Simon  Magus  masquerading  under  a  Christian 
name. 


196  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Christian  writers  in  our  period  giving  more  than  a 
small  share  of  thought  to  Jewish  assaults  upon  Chris- 
tianity or  Jewish  perversions  of  Christianity.  We 
do  find  the  great  teachers  of  the  Church  deeply  oc- 
cupied with  the  conflict  against  Gnostic  ideas  and 
Gnostic  sects. 

Gnosis  is  the  Greek  word  for  "knowledge,"  or 
"science."  The  Gnostic,  correspondingly,  is  the 
man  who  is  supposed  to  have  knowledge  beyond  the 
range  of  common  men.  As  he  got  his  knowledge 
out  of  his  own  head  by  the  simple  process  of  reject- 
ing everything  in  Apostolic  Christianity  which  did 
not  satisfy  his  own  mind,  and  adding  in  everything 
which  did  particularly  commend  itself  to  him  as  an 
answer  to  the  great  questions  of  the  universe,  there 
were  naturally  a  great  many  varieties  of  him.  Thus 
we  hear  of  the  followers  of  Basilides  and  of  Satur- 
ninus,  of  the  Valentinians  and  of  the  Marcosians,  of 
the  Ophites  and  of  the  Naassenes,  and  many  more. 
It  is  impossible  now  to  get  a  clear  view  of  their 
characteristic  differences.  It  would  be  useless  for 
our  present  purpose,  if  we  could.  It  must  suffice  to 
give  a  notion  of  some  general  features  of  Gnostic 
thought,  and  a  few  illustrations  of  their  working  out 
in  particular  Gnostic  systems. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Gnostic  sects  stood  for  the 
general  principle  of  Rationalism  as  against  the  prin- 
ciple of  Traditionalism.  The  modern  mind  has  a 
prejudice  in  favor  of  Rationalism  as  if  it  must  be 
rational,  and  against  Traditionalism,  as  if  that 
must  mean  the  acceptance  of  everything  that  has 
ever  been   told  as  a  tradition.     A  distinction  more 


Rationalism  vs.   Traditionalism.  197 

nearly  accurate  would  be  that  Rationalism  is  a 
method  of  ingenious  fancy,  and  Traditionalism  a 
method  of  exact  historical  science.  The  historical 
method  appeals  to  an  unbroken  chain  of  testimony 
as  to  what  the  Divine  Revealer,  Jesus  Christ,  actu- 
ally conveyed  to  His  disciples,  and  regards  that  as  a 
religion  necessarily  and  infallibly  true.  The  Ration- 
alist method  asks  whether  this  or  that  statement  in 
religion  satisfies  the  enquirer's  mind.  The  Rational- 
ist is  profoundly  right,  we  may  add,  in  claiming 
that  no  man  can  really  accept  anything  as  true 
which  antagonizes  his  reason  and  conscience.  But 
on  the  other  hand,  the  Traditionalist  has  just  as 
much  reason  for  suggesting  that  if  a  divine  revela- 
tion does  not  commend  itself  to  a  man's  mind,  the 
fault  is  as  likely  to  be  with  the  mind  as  with  the 
revelation.  A  man's  reason  and  conscience  ought 
generally  to  be  satisfied  that  a  thing  is  true,  if  there 
is  sufficient  historical  proof  that  God  has  said  it. 
That  is  the  claim  of  a  true  Traditionalism.  That  is 
the  claim  which  Gnosticism  in  every  age  has  brushed 
aside. 

In  the  next  place,  as  the  name  might  suggest,  the 
Gnostic  had  an  exaggerated  idea  of  the  value  of 
knowledge.  He  held,  as  many  do  in  these  days,  that 
education  was  salvation.  All  sin  was  delusion.  Even 
the  host  of  evil  spirits  were  represented  as  enslaved 
by  error,  rather  than  as  wilfully  choosing  evil  when 
good  was  before  them.  As  in  these  days,  so  in  those, 
the  consequences  of  such  a  theory  were  bad.  Sin 
could  not  appear  as  "  exceeding  sinful,"  when  it  was 
explained  as  a  mere  folly  growing  out  of  imperfect 


198  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

culture,  a  fault  which  better  knowledge  would  cer- 
tainly do  away.  The  Gnostic  in  all  ages  is  apt  to  be 
strong  in  the  cultivation  of  some  intellectual  proc- 
esses, wise  or  otherwise,  but  his  pupils  will  be  weak 
in  the  cultivation  of  character. 

Another  common  feature  of  the  Gnostic  sects  was 
the  habit  of  regarding  matter  as  evil.  That  also 
keeps  cropping  up  in  every  age,  that  easy  answer  to 
the  question  of  the  origin  of  evil.  "  The  spirit  is 
good,"  says  the  Gnostic  ;  "  the  flesh  is  bad.  Man  is 
dragged  down  by  the  imprisonment  of  his  spirit  in 
his  body.  Deliver  him  from  that  bondage,  and  he 
will  soon,  and  easily,  be  perfected."  That  Gnostic 
tendency  reappears  to-day  in  the  popular  reception 
of  what  is  called  "  Christian  Science,"  which  teaches 
that  "matter"  is  a  mere  delusion  fastened  upon  the 
spirit  by  "mortal  mind,"  a  deceiving  lower  principle, 
and  again  in  the  still  more  popular  opposition  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  so  many 
preferring  to  think  that  a  man's  true  resurrection  is 
a  rising  out  of  his  body  at  his  death. 

These  two  notions,  that  knowledge  is  salvation, 
and  that  matter  is  an  evil  power  which  must  be 
shaken  off  as  a  condition  of  passing  into  a  higher 
state  of  being,  led  some  high-minded  men  to  devote 
themselves  nobly  to  "  plain  living  and  high  think- 
ing." Some  of  the  Gnostic  founders  were  certainly 
men  of  devotion  and  self-denial,  running  even  to  an 
extreme  asceticism.  But  frequently  the  followers 
of  such  teachers  ran,  after  a  generation  or  so,  into 
depths  of  licentious  immorality.  The  body  was  an 
evil  thing  anyhow.     Why  try  to  keep  it  from  doing 


The  Creator  of  the  World  not  the  True  God.     199 

evil  things  ?  The  only  course  for  the  true  Gnostic 
was  to  let  his  body  do  as  it  would,  and  keep  his  soul 
proudly  apart,  well  aware  that  it  was  a  separate 
organism,  with  a  distinct  character  of  its  own  now 
and  a  distinct  destiny  of  its  own  hereafter.  Some 
Gnostic  sects,  in  fact,  seem  to  have  started  with  this 
doctrine  of  practical  corruption  from  the  very  first. 

From  a  deep  feeling  of  the  evil  of  matter  came 
naturally  the  idea  that  the  Supreme  God,  the  Lord 
of  truth  and  grace,  could  not  be  the  Creator  of  sin- 
ful flesh,  nor  yet  of  this  visible  structure  of  heavens 
and  earth.  One  hears  much  in  Gnostic  systems  of 
the  Demiurgus,  or  Demiurge, — it  is  a  Greek  word 
meaning  "  World-maker," — but  he  is  always  repre- 
sented as  a  rival  of  the  true  God,  or  as  a  very  in- 
ferior, and  very  ignorant  and  blundering,  subordi- 
nate. Hence  in  some  Gnostic  s}rstems  the  Creator 
is  the  jealous  God  of  the  Jews  and  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, meanly  setting  himself  up  against  human 
progress,  and  against  the  nobler  God  of  the  Chris- 
tian Revelation.  In  some  such  systems  the  serpent 
was  exalted  to  a  splendid  position  as  the  chief  repre- 
sentative of  light  and  progress,  and  the  relentless 
foe  of  the  Demiurge,  who  tries  to  hold  him  down. 
Hence  come  such  names  among  Gnostic  sects  as 
Ophites  and  Naassenes,  from  the  Greek  and  Hebrew 
words  for  "serpent"  in  Gen.  iii.  Of  course,  if  the 
Old  Testament  Creator  was  an  evil  deity,  Adam  and 
Eve  were  true  Gnostics  in  refusing  to  obey  him,  and 
the  serpent  was  a  Saviour. 

One  more  feature,  common  to  all  Gnostic  systems, 
but   working   out  into  the   most  various  results  in 


200  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

different  hands,  was  a  certain  fashion  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  Holy  Scripture.  They  approached  the 
Scriptures  with  preconceived  ideas  as  to  what  a  rev- 
elation from  God  ought  to  contain.  The  philosophic 
thought  of  that  day  was  intensely  eager  to  know 
the  mystery  of  the  origin  of  evil,  and  correspond- 
ingly, of  the  origin  of  this  curiously  mixed  world  of 
so  many  good  and  evil  powers.  The  Christian 
Scriptures  did  not  offer  on  the  surface  any  answer 
satisfactory  to  such  enquirers.  Then  it  must  be, 
argued  the  Gnostic,  that  these  sacred  books  contain 
such  an  answer  below  the  surface.  That  the  Old 
Testament  Scripture  was  rich  in  mystical  meanings, 
not  at  all  apparent  on  the  surface  of  the  narrative, 
was  agreed  by  all  who  at  that  time  received  them  as 
a  divine  gift.  Furthermore,  -and  this  is  a  key  to 
the  understanding  of  much  in  the  growth  of  Gnostic 
theologies, — it  had  come  to  pass  that  in  the  Christian 
reading  of  these  ancient  books  certain  names  which 
had  passed  for  ages  as  standing  only  for  attributes 
of  Almighty  God,  were  now  found  to  be  really 
names  of  Divine  Persons.  The  Word  of  God  was 
found  to  be  a  Personal  Power.  The  Breath,  or  Spirit, 
of  God  sprang  into  life  in  the  same  way.  The  Wis- 
dom of  God  was  no  longer  an  abstraction,  or  an  at- 
tribute, but  a  living  Personality.  Why  might  not  a 
discerning  eye  discover  a  long  array  of  personal 
forces  revealed  as  helping  or  hindering  the  develop- 
ment of  the  universe,  where  common  men  would 
find  nothing  but  abstract  qualities  or  familiar  facts? 
Once  embarked  on  such  a  voyage  of  discovery  in 
the  volume  of  Holy  Scripture,  each  Gnostic  system 


The   Gnostic    Vieiu  of  JEons.  201 

was  liable  to  find  more  than  any  of  its  predecessors 
had  dreamed  of,  till  that  of  Valentinus  numbered 
thirty  of  these  mysterious  powers,  arranged  in  pairs, 
a  male  and  a  corresponding  female  in  every  pair,1  be- 
ginning with  Arrhetus,  or  Bythus,  (the  Unspeakable, 
or  the  Great  Deep),  and  Sige  (Silence),  and  passing 
on  through  Nous  and  Aletheia  (Mind  and  Truth), 
Logos  and  Zoe  (Word  and  Life).  Were  such  powers 
anywhere  alluded  to  in  Scripture  under  a  common 
name  ?  "  Yes  !  "  said  some  at  least  among  the  Gnos- 
tics, "  we  read  here  and  there  mysterious  words 
about  JEons,  as  where  St.  Paul  says  to  the  Corin- 
thians (1  Cor.  ii.  7),  We  speak  the  wisdom  of  God 
in  a  mystery,  even  that  hidden  wisdom  which  God  or- 
dained before  the  JEons  [A.  V.,  before  the  ivorld];  or 
to  the  Ephesians  (Eph.  iii.  9,  11),  To  make  all  men 
see  what  is  the  fellowship  of  the  mystery  which  from  the 
JEons  [A.  V.,  from  the  beginning  of  the  world]  hath 
been  hid  in  God,  .  .  .  according  to  the  purpose  of  the 
JEons  [A.  V.,  eternal  pwyose],  which  He  purposed  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord;  or  to  the  Colossians,  (Col.  i. 
26),  The  mystery  which  hath  been  hid  from  the  uEons 
and  from  the  Generations  [A.  V.,  from  ages  and  gen- 
erations'] ;  or  again  (1  Tim.  i.  17)  of  the  King  of  the 
JEons  [A.  V.,  King  eternal  ]  ;  and  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  (i.  2)  we  find  by  whom  also  He  made 
the  JEons  [A.  V.,  ivorlds].  In  all  these  places  we 
find  no  mere  prosaic  statement  about  long  periods  of 

1Here  was  another  common  Gnostic  idea.  The  revelation  that 
is  in  the  natural  world,  they  would  say,  shows  all  new  creation  to 
be  the  result  of  the  union  of  a  male  and  a  female  principle. 
Therefore  the  original  creation  must  have  come  about  in  the  same 
way. 


202  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

time,  but  a  revelation  of  personal  powers  proceeding 
from  the  Great  First  Source  of  all  Being,  and  grow- 
ing weaker  and  more  liable  to  delusion,  as  they  get 
farther  from  the  great  Original  in  their  evolution. 
What  the  Supreme  God  created  immediately  could 
not  possibly  fall  into  evil,  but  He  has  given  life  to 
certain  beings  called  iEons,  and  they  in  turn  to 
others,  and  these  to  still  others  in  a  descending  scale 
of  power  and  knowledge.  From  some  of  the  last 
and  lowest  of  these  powers  must  have  proceeded  such 
disorder  and  baseness  as  are  seen  in  our  earthly 
life."  Such,  we  may  suppose,  would  be  the  defence 
of  a  Valentinus,  with  his  thirty  iEons,  against  the 
charge  of  putting  forth  a  groundless  fancy. 

From  the  general  prejudice  against  matter  as  evil, 
it  further  followed  that  the  Supreme  God  could  not 
by  these  wilful  enquirers  be  regarded  as  having 
taken  human  flesh.  The  Word  was  made  flesh,  and 
dwelt  among  us,  had  to  be  erased  or  explained  away 
in  a  Gnostic  Gospel.  There  were  two  ways  of  doing 
this.  Either  (1)  our  Lord's  bodily  life  was  treated 
as  a  mere  illusion  of  the  senses, — He  never  was  truly 
born,  He  never  had  a  real  body  of  flesh,  He  only 
seemed  to  suffer  on  the  Cross,  being  all  through  a 
bodiless  spirit  raised  serenely  above  the  common  ex- 
periences of  humanity.  He  never  was  tired  or 
hungry  or  sad  or  indignant  or  gratified,  in  all  His 
career, — or  else  (2)  the  great  iEon  Christ  was 
represented  as  having  entered  into  the  man  Jesus, 
either  at  His  conception,  or  as  it  was  more  often 
taught,  at  His  baptism,  and  as  having  left  that  man 
of  sorrows  to  his  fate,  when  crucifixion  threatened, 


Gnostic  Contrast  of  Pneumatic  and  Psychic.      203 

and  retired  again  into  the  Pleroma  (Fulness),  which 
the  Gnostics  took  to  be  the  name  of  that  part  of  the 
universe  where  evil  had  no  entrance,  our  lower  world 
being  known  in  contrast  as  the  Kenoma  (Emptiness). 
Those  Gnostics  who  held  the  former  view  were  called 
Docetse  (Visionaries)  because  they  held  that  our  Lord 
had  only  a  visionary  body.  It  was  against  them  that 
the  passion  of  faith  burned  hotly,  when  St.  John  was 
writing  his  epistles.  Many  deceivers  are  gone  forth 
into  the  ivorld,  he  says,  even  they  that  confess  not  that 
Jesus  Christ  comeih  in  the  flesh.  This  is  the  deceiver 
and  the  antichrist  (2  John  7).  Against  them 
Ignatius  also  bursts  into  flame  in  his  letters 
written  on  his  way  to  martyrdom.  So  he  says  to 
the  Smyrnseans  (II.),  "  He  suffered  truly,  as  also  He 
raised  Himself  truly ;  not  as  certain  unbelievers  say, 
that  He  suffered  in  semblance,  being  themselves 
mere  semblance."  One  may  wonder  whether  the 
bishop  of  Syria  had  here  a  sarcastic  reference  to  one 
more  habit  of  Gnostic  thinkers.  They  divided  men, 
as  indeed  St.  Paul  had  done,  into  two  classes,  "  the 
pneumatic  "  and  "  the  psychic."  "  Spiritual  "  is  the 
just  rendering  of  one  of  these  words  in  our  English 
version,  but  "  natural "  is  a  mere  misrepresentation 
of  the  other.  When  St.  Paul  spoke  of  a  "man  of 
the  spirit "  and  a  "  man  of  the  soul,"  he  meant  very 
nearly  "  man  of  conscience  "  and  "  man  of  inclina- 
tion." 1     But  Gnostic  teachers,  though  they  had  not 

1  So  in  that  famous  passage,  1  Cor.  xv.  44,  St.  Paul  is  contrast- 
ing not  a  material  body  and  an  immaterial  body,  which  last  is  a 
contradiction  in  terms,  such  as  a  sensible  man  should  be  ashamed 
to  catch  himself  thinking,  but  a  "body  of  the  soul,"  or  body 
doing  as  it  likes,  with  all  the  evil  consequences  of  such  doing,  and 


204  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  help  of  our  absurd  English  contrast  of  "spiritual" 
and  "  natural "  to  put  people  on  the  wrong  track, 
certainly  made  out  the  "  man  of  spirit "  to  be  raised 
above  the  sympathies  and  the  fair  partnership  of  the 
flesh  in  a  way  that  St.  Paul  would  have  condemned. 
They  made  a  third  class  of  "  hylic  "  men,  or  "  men 
of  matter,"  bringing  in  just  that  contrast  of  spirit 
and  matter  which  St.  Paul  did  not  suggest  in  his 
"spiritual"  and  "psychical,"  and  they  quite  taught 
that  a  man  could  not  be  a  thoroughly  good  specimen 
of  spirit,  while  he  continued  to  live  in  a  body  at  all. 
To  such  Ignatius  seems  to  say,  "  You  may  believe 
what  you  please  about  your  own  bodies.  You  may 
get  rid  of  them  altogether.  Certainly  your  teaching 
has  no  substance  to  it.  It  is  a  mere  ghost  of  a 
Gospel.  But  my  Saviour  is  real.  His  suffering  for 
me  was  real.  His  death  was  real.  You  may  be  set 
down  as  mere  phantoms  in  your  false  spirituality. 
Our  Jesus  Christ  is  a  real  man." 

And  yet  Gnosticism  represented  what  humanity 
liked  just  then  to  believe,  and  therefore  it  was  be- 
lieved very  widely.  Beginning  before  the  Apostolic 
Age  was  closed,  and  apparently  in  Syria,  it  spread 
fast  and  far.  Just  because  it  was  an  embodiment  of 
what  men  felt  like  thinking  at  the  time,  it  was  con- 
stantly shifting  and  changing,  never  appearing  in 
two  countries  in  exactly  the  same  form,  never  trans- 
mitted from  one  generation  to  another  without 
change.     Gnostic  rationalism,  being  the  play  of  self- 

a  "body  of  the  spirit,"  or  body  yielding  itself  to  the  control  of 
conscience,  and  doing  as  it  ought.  Why  should  a  body  of  the 
spirit  be  supposed  to  be  less  material  than  a  body  of  the  soul  ? 


Nicolas  the  Deacon.     Marcion  of  Pontus.      205 

indulgent  fancy  that  it  was,  had  no  more  history  than 
the  succession  of  cloud-shadows  that  flit  across  a  hill- 
side on  a  summer  morning.  Both  the  clouds  and  the 
fancies  are  bound  by  natural  laws,  no  doubt,  but 
they  do  not  make  a  story  that  the  mind  of  man  can 
follow.  Occasionally  a  picturesque  figure  stands  out 
from  the  confusion.  Such  was  Nicolas,  if  it  be  really 
true, — the  traditions  on  the  subject  are  greatly 
divided,  and  very  uncertain, — that  he  was  one  of  the 
Hellenist  deacons  set  apart  by  the  Apostles  in  the 
honorable  companionship  of  Stephen  and  Philip 
(Acts  vi.),  and  that  afterwards  he  became  the  founder 
of  that  sect  of  the  Nicolaitans,  of  whose  deeds  and 
doctrines  our  Lord's  own  saying  is,  Which  thing  I 
hate  (Rev.  ii.  6,  15).  "  The  flesh  must  be  abused," 
was  one  of  his  sayings,  according  to  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  who  is  presumably  good  authority,  and 
he  is  represented  as  a  passionate,  unbalanced  soul, 
who  being  rebuked  by  the  Apostles  for  bitter  jealousy 
of  his  beautiful  wife,  flew  to  a  wild  extreme  of  self- 
renunciation,  and  offered  to  give  her  up  to  any  man 
who  would  take  her  from  him.  "  The  flesh  must  be 
abused  "  meant  to  him  an  extreme  asceticism,  and 
Clement  bears  witness  that  he  and  his  children  after 
him  lived  good  lives.  But  it  does  seem  as  if  some 
persons  claiming  to  be  his  followers  used  the  same 
formula  to  cover  shameless  immorality  and  extreme 
self-indulgence. 

Another  picturesque  figure  is  that  of  Marcion,  son 
of  a  bishop  in  Pontus,  and  himself  a  man  of  earnest 
purpose  and  blameless  in  morals,  but  wholly  unready 
to  submit  himself  to  the  revelation  of  the  Christian 


206  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

faith.  Excommunicated  by  his  own  father,  he  makes 
his  way  to  Rome,  preaching  with  much  acceptance 
his  doctrine  of  two  gods,  the  god  of  the  Jews,  re- 
sponsible for  creation  and  for  the  Old  Testament, 
and  the  greater  god  who  had  now  sent  the  light  of 
Christianity,  intending  to  save  men  from  the  bondage 
of  material  things,  and  from  the  fear  and  service  of 
the  creator  of  them.  At  Rome,  in  A.  D.  153  or  154, 
he  meets  an  old  friend  of  his  father's  and  his  own, 
Polycarp,  the  venerable  bishop  of  Smyrna,  come  on 
an  important  errand  which  we  shall  consider  in 
another  connection.  "  Dost  thou  not  recognize  me  ?  " 
he  cries,  as  his  sweet-natured  old  friend  passes  by 
him  without  salutation  in  a  public  place.  "  I  recog- 
nize the  firstborn  of  Satan,"  was  the  stern  reply. 
The  story  is  unlovely.  Perhaps  Marcion  was  noble 
in  his  mistakes,  was  really  helping  the  world  towards 
Jesus  Christ  by  his  unselfish  moral  earnestness,  and 
ought  to  have  had  from  one  of  Christ's  bishops  sym- 
pathy, rather  than  reproach,  when  he  could  not  be- 
lieve. But  after  all  Polycarp  knew  more  of  Mar- 
cion's  movement  than  we  do,  and  at  least  the  story 
shows  what  Gnosticism  meant  to  him.  It  was  not 
merely  a  dangerous  bar  to  the  progress  of  the  Chris- 
tian Kingdom,  not  merely  a  fascinating  delusion 
which  might  draw  even  the  children  of  the  King- 
dom, like  Marcion  himself,  from  light  to  darkness, — 
more  than  all  this  it  was  an  intellectual  sin.  It  was 
a  disloyalty,  a  disservice,  whereby  a  man  refused  to 
serve  God  with  his  mind.  It  is  worth  while  to  re- 
member that  Polycarp  was  so  far  right,  as  that  unbe- 
lief, often  a  misfortune  of  the  judgment,  may  also  be 
in  some  cases  a  fault  of  the  will. 


Lesson  of  Gnosticism  for  Nineteenth  Century.     207 

There  is  no  evil  out  of  which  good  does  not  some- 
how come.  Out  of  the  confusion  and  strife  of  the 
Gnostic  systems  the  Church  gained  much  at  the  time, 
and  ought  to  gain  something  now.  At  the  time 
Gnostic  criticism  helped  to  clarify  Catholic  tradition. 
It  forced  Christian  men  to  face  the  questions,  "  What 
do  we  know?  "  and  "  Why  do  we  believe  ?  "  It  was 
of  inestimable  value  to  the  Church  to  be  obliged  to 
begin  to  contend  earnestly  for  the  faith  before  there 
was  any  possibility  that  her  leaders  could  have  for- 
gotten what  the  faith  was.  It  is  just  that  strife  about 
the  Gnosis,  so  early  and  so  bitter,  that  enables  us  to 
depend  confidently  upon  the  tradition  of  the  Catho- 
lic Faith  to-day. 

For  us  in  these  modern  times  there  is  a  further 
gain  in  the  calling  up  of  this  Gnostic  nonsense  of 
seventeen  or  eighteen  centuries  ago.  It  shows  us 
how  little  the  spirit  of  the  age  can  be  trusted  to  meet 
the  religious  needs  of  the  age.  Gnosticism  was  folly, 
but  it  was  not  the  work  of  fools.  It  represents  the 
best  work  that  some  of  the  best  minds  of  that  age 
could  do  in  providing  themselves  with  a  religion, 
when  God's  religion  did  not  suit  them.  Our  age  is 
another  age  of  restlessness,  of  fanciful  speculation, 
of  religion-making.  Again  an  enormous  value  is  set 
on  knowledge,  on  education.  Again  men  are  looking 
for  a  religion  that  can  meet  their  wants.  The  old 
religion  which  alone  succeeded  in  meeting  men's 
needs  in  the  second  and  third  centuries,  will  alone 
meet  any  real  needs  of  the  nineteenth  century,  or 
even  of  the  twentieth. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THEEE  INTERIOR  STRIFES  :    THE  PASCHAL  QUESTION  ; 
MONTANISM  ;    SABELLIANISM. 

ERSECUTIONS  by  the  heathen  state, 
distractions  from  the  preaching  of  rival 
new  religions,  these  exterior  difficulties 
in  the  Church's  way  have  occupied  us. 
We  must  now  give  attention  to  three 
interior  strifes  which  disturbed  the  Church's  peace 
in  the  close  of  the  second  and  the  beginning  of  the  fol- 
lowing century.  The  first  of  these  controversies 
was  concerned  with  a  purely  ecclesiastical,  one  might 
almost  say,  a  ritual  question,  as  to  the  time  when  the 
Church  should  keep  its  annual  commemoration  of 
the  Lord's  death  and  resurrection.  The  third  was 
about  a  purely  theological  question,  the  right  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  the  Being  of  God  in  the 
Blessed  Trinity.  The  second,  that  of  Montanism, 
raised  a  question  harder  to  describe.  Perhaps  it  may 
best  be  called  a  constitutional  question,  for  though 
both  doctrines  and  practices  were  concerned,  the 
issue  was  not  so  much  whether  any  particular  doc- 
trine was  true,  or  any  particular  practice  obligatory, 
as  whether  the  Christian  revelation  of  infallible 
truth  was  a  full  and  final  one,  or  rather  the  begin- 
ning of  an  indefinite  series,  to  which  equally  infalli- 
ble additions  might  be  made  at  any  time.     Each  of 

208 


The   Quartodeciman   Controversy.  209 

these  three  controversies  will  bring  before  us  a  great 
theological  writer,  a  man  of  real  leadership.  In  the 
first  and  third  cases  the  great  man  will  be  ranged  on 
the  right  side  of  the  controversy.  In  the  second, 
unhappily,  we  shall  find  the  splendid  powers  of  the 
North  African  master,  Tertullian,  betrayed  into  the 
service  of  error. 

I.  Our  first  subject  must  be  what  is  known  as 
the  Quartodeciman  Controversy.  Our  Lord  was 
crucified  and  rose  from  the  dead,  when  the  Jewish 
Church  was  keeping  its  annual  festival  of  the  Pass- 
over. From  that  time  forth  every  return  of  that  fes- 
tival season  would  naturally  affect  the  mind  of  a 
Jewish  Christian  with  profound  and  tender  stirrings 
of  remembrance  of  the  Evangelical  history.  For 
many  years  after  our  Lord's  death  some  such  Chris- 
tians must  have  gone  on  keeping  the  Passover  in 
their  old  fashion,  only  with  an  immensity  of  new 
meaning,  knowing  that  Jesus  Christ  had  suffered  as 
the  true  Paschal  Lamb,  and  that  this  celebration  was 
but  one  of  many  forms  by  which  men  had  been 
taught  to  show  His  death.  Now,  according  to  Jew- 
ish law,  the  lamb  for  the  Passover  was  killed  on  the 
fourteenth  day  of  the  month  Nisan,  that  is,  on  the 
day  of  the  full  moon  next  following  the  vernal  equi- 
nox, and  the  supper  was  eaten  on  that  evening  after 
sunset,  which  by  Jewish  reckoning  would  be  in  the 
first  hours  of  the  fifteenth  day.  It  was  natural  for 
Jewish  Christians,  trained  to  regard  the  fourteenth 
of  Nisan  as  a  day  of  fasting,  and  to  burst  into  festal 
joy  in  the  first  hours  of  the  fifteenth,  to  do  much  the 
same  thing  year  after  year  in  their  new  position, 
N 


210  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

commemorating  our  Lord's  death  with  a  solemn  fast, 
longer  or  shorter,  but  bringing  this  fast  to  an  end, 
and  joyfully  celebrating  the  resurrection,  as  soon  as 
that  hour  was  come  when  by  ancient  tradition  all 
Israel  was  called  to  celebrate  their  deliverance  out 
of  the  bondage  of  Egypt.  Certainly  that  deliver- 
ance was  a  foreshadowing  of  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus  Christ  from  His  tomb  in  the  rock  as  well  as  of 
the  resurrection  of  His  people  to  spiritual  life. 
From  such  an  observance  all  who  kept  this  form  of 
Christian  Passover  came  to  be  known  as  Quarto- 
decimam,  observers  of  the  fourteenth  day.  This 
custom  had  the  sanction  of  St.  John,  and  was  par- 
ticularly strongly  entrenched  in  the  Roman  province 
of  Asia,  where  his  influence  was  most  powerful  in 
forming  religious  fashions.  Probably  the  earliest 
custom  was  to  have  something  like  a  Passover  sup- 
per1 in  the  evening,  when  the  fifteenth  day  was  un- 
derstood to  have  begun,  passing  on  into  a  celebra- 
tion of  the  Eucharist.  Later,  we  may  suppose  that 
the  rejoicing  would  begin  with  an  evening  feast 
in  private  houses,  and  culminate  in  the  Easter  Eu- 
charist early  on  the  next  morning.  But  about  these 
matters  of  detail  we  have  no  information. 

Meanwhile  another  use  had  sprung  up  in  the 
Church,  notably  in  the  great  city  of  Rome,  whose 
people  were  much  accustomed  to  giving  the  law  to 
their  neighbors,  in  fashions,  as  in  everything  else. 
This  rival  usage  was  that  with  which  we  are  familiar, 

•  Of  course,  it  was  only  in  Jerusalem,  and  only  while  the  Tem- 
ple stood,  that  any  Jews,  Christian  or  other,  could  have  eaten  the 
paschal  lamb. 


Our  Easter  Rule  not  Apostolic.  211 

which  notes  that  our  Lord  died  on  the  sixth  day  of 
the  week  and  rose  on  the  eighth,  or  next  recurring 
first  day,  and  holds  the  annual  commemoration  to 
these  days,  to  what  we  call  Friday  and  Sunday. 
It  was  the  natural  course  for  Gentile  Christians  to 
follow.  To  them  the  Passover  was  hardly  more  than 
a  name,  and  as  the  first  day  of  every  week  was  kept 
as  a  feast  of  the  Lord's  resurrection,  it  was  the 
obvious  thing  to  do  to  take  one  of  those  same  Sun- 
days every  spring  for  the  greater,  annual  feast  of  the 
resurrection. 

Certainly  it  seems  a  far  more  desirable  practice, 
more  historical,  more  dramatic.  But  however  much 
better  our  familiar  practice  of  keeping  Easter  always 
on  a  Sunday  may  be,  it  was  distinctly  a  practice 
that  arose  among  Gentile  Christians,  and  it  seems 
never  to  have  had  claimed  for  it  the  authority  of 
any  of  the  Apostles.  To  all  appearance,  it  must 
have  grown  up  out  of  the  independent  common 
sense  of  some  of  the  Churches  of  the  West  against 
an  absolutely  universal  tradition  based  on  a  unani- 
mous Apostolic  consent.  The  new  movement,  how- 
ever, was  a  movement  in  a  popular  direction.  Jewish 
influence  was  falling  lower  and  lower  in  the  Church 
of  the  early  second  century.  Bitterness  against  any- 
thing that  could  be  called  "  Judaizing  "  was  rising 
higher  and  higher.  The  innovation  spread.  The 
Quartodeciman  use  became  more  and  more  rare. 
Even  in  Palestine,  after  Jerusalem  gave  place  to 
iElia  Capitolina,  with  a  Gentile  Church,  and  Gen- 
tile names  in  its  list  of  bishops,  the  Quartodeciman 
Easter  must  nearly  have  disappeared,  for  Eusebius, 


212  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

who  lived  in  Palestine  himself,  declares  that  it  came 
to  be  limited  to  the  Churches  of  "  Asia,"  i.  e.,  of  the 
Roman  province  of  that  name. 

But  there  in  Western  Asia  Minor  the  rising  tide 
of  change  came  to  an  impassable  barrier,  and  hence 
after  a  time  came  strife.  At  first  men  had  contended 
about  the  new  scheme  with  no  thought  but  for  their 
immediate  preferencs,  to  be  saved,  or  sacrificed,  as 
the  case  might  be.  Later  the  Church  woke  up  to 
the  fact  that  the  different  issues  of  the  struggle  in  dif- 
erent  lands  constituted  a  result  which  was  a  scandal. 
Different  Churches  were  keeping  Easter  on  different 
days.  A  Christian  might  leave  Ephesus  fresh  from 
the  joy  of  his  Easter  Communion,  and  find  the 
brethren  in  Corinth  still  keeping  their  fast  for 
the  Lord's  death.  Was  it  really  a  scandal?  The 
men  of  those  days  thought  so,  and  it  brings  out 
vividly  their  deep  sense  of  the  oneness  of  the 
Church  of  Christ,  as  a  Catholic  organization,  single 
and  indivisible  in  all  its  spreading  life.  They  actu- 
ally felt  their  own  oneness  with  one  another  so  much 
that  it  was  a  source  of  shame  and  grief,  and  hence 
of  bitterness,  that  the  widely  separated  Churches  of 
Gaul,  Italy,  North  Africa,  Greece,  Asia  Minor, 
Egypt,  Syria,  should  not  all  keep  their  annual  com- 
memoration of  the  Resurrection  on  the  same  day  ! 

So  early  as  the  middle  of  the  century  the  ugliness 
of  this  difference  had  come  to  be  keenly  felt,  and  the 
blessed  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna,  though  bowed 
Avith  the  burden  of  his  many  years  of  service,  made 
a  journey  to  Rome,  and  there  discussed  the  matter 
with    Anicetus,    lately   made   bishop   of  the  Roman 


Poly  carp  and  Anicetus  Agree  to  Differ.        213 

Christians.1  "  Observing  "  and  "  not  observing  " 
were  the  watchwords  on  either  side,  having  reference 
to  the  observance  or  non-observance  of  the  Pass- 
over day,  Nisan  14.  To  Polycarp  and  those  whom 
he  represented  it  seemed  intolerable  that  they  should 
be  asked  to  set  aside  the  Apostolic  practice  and 
direction.  To  Anicetus  and  to  the  leaders  of  the 
Church  generally,  it  seemed  too  unreasonable  that 
an  improvement  so  great  that  it  had  commended 
itself  to  well-nigh  the  whole  Church  should  be  given 
up,  simply  because  the  Apostles  had  not  thought  of 
it  before  they  died.  Polycarp  could  not  bring 
Anicetus  to  observe  the  Jewish  feast-day,  and  Ani- 
cetus could  not  persuade  Polycarp  not  to  observe  it, 
but  the  difference,  though  a  cause  of  sorrow,  was 
not  allowed  to  make  a  breach  of  peace.  The  new 
bishop  of  Rome  was  even  ready  to  grant  that  Chris- 
tians from  Asia,  living  temporarily  in  Rome,  might 
keep  their  separate  Easter  uninterfered  with,  a  great 
concession  in  view  of  the  feeling  of  the  day  about 
matters  of  external  unity,  and  further  invited  his 
brother  of  Smyrna  to  celebrate  the  Eucharist  in  his 
place,  the  highest  token  of  Christian  fellowship  which 
one  bishop  could  give  another. 

Such  was  the  settlement  of  saints,  but  settlements 

xThe  martyrdom  of  Polycarp  took  place  in  February,  155,  and 
the  accession  of  Anicetus  cannot,  be  placed  earlier  than  153.  It 
seems  probable  that  Polycarp  went  to  Eome  on  purpose  to  see  if 
a  new  bishop  could  not  be  persuaded  to  adopt  a  new  policy  for 
the  peace  and  honor  of  the  Church.  That  this  visit  was  made  at 
Easter-tide,  as  asserted  by  Bishop  Lightfoot  {Clement  of  Rome,  i. 
342,  but  not  in  Ignatius  and  Polycarp,  i.  449,  450),  is  a  conclusion 
not  warranted  by  the  words  of  Irenseus,  who  says  simply  that 
neither  persuaded  the  other  to  change  his  practice,  not  that  they 
did  practise  their  differing  customs  then  and  there. 


214  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 


made  b}^  saints  are  rarety  final  in  Church  contro- 
versy. The  rank  and  file  of  Christians,  whose 
sanctification  has  had  very  little  development,  and 
who  have  still  a  good  deal  of  narrow  meanness  in 
their  hearts,  have  something  to  say.  They  say  it, 
and  the  controversy  boils  up  again.  Anicetus  and 
Polycarp  had  agreed  to  differ,  and  the  martyrdom 
of  Polycarp,  following  probably  within  a  year,  had 
hallowed  that  agreement,  and  sealed  it  as  with  holy 
blood.  Then  for  a  few  years  persecution  was  par- 
ticularly active,  and  an  external  pressure  forced 
Christians  to  think  of  something  deeper  than  their 
differences  of  opinion,  and  drove  them  heart  to  heart. 
But  in  about  ten  years  we  hear  of  trouble  again, 
and  this  time  in  the  province  of  Asia.  A  party  is 
forming  even  there,  down  on  the  southeastern  bor- 
der, who  want  to  do  as  the  rest  of  the  Church  does. 
Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  whom  we  have  mentioned 
as  an  Apologist  (p.  161),  wrote  two  books  on  the 
Pascha,1  because  "a  great  strife  had  arisen  over  this 
question  in  Laodicea,  after  the  bishop  Sagaris  had 
suffered  martyrdom,  the  Pascha  having  fallen  op- 
portunely in  those  days.  "  "  Fallen  opportunely  " 
must  be  the  meaning  rather  than  "  according  to 
rule  "  (as  in  Dr.  McGiffert's  Uusebius  iv.,  26,)  for 
the  Passover  fell  "  according  to  rule  "  every  year. 
Probably  the    reference  is  to   a  coincidence   of  the 

1  Pascha  was  the  word  used  by  Greek  and  Latin  speakers  to 
represent  the  Hebrew  word  for  "  Passover.  "  It  was  used  by 
Christians  also  for  their  Easter,  the  Christian  Passover,  whether 
they  kept  it  by  a  Jewish  rule  or  otherwise.  Good  Friday  and 
even  Holy  "Week  came  to  be  called  the  Pascha  Staurosimon,  or 
Pasch  of  the  Crucifixion,  and  Easter  Day  and  the  week  follow- 
ing the  Pascha  Anastasimon,  or  Pasch  of  the  Eesurrection. 


The  Testimony  of  Claudius  Apolinarhis .       215 

two  rules,  so  that  the  Jewish  Feast  fell  on  the 
Sunday  which  by  the  other  reckoning  was  Easter 
Day,  March  26,  A.  D.164.  That  year  Laodicea  had  kept 
Easter  on  the  same  day  with  Christians  in  the  next 
province.  There  was  probably  an  attempt  to  get  a 
new  bishop  to  adopt  a  new  policy,  and  the  approach 
of  the  next  Easter  was  the  natural  occasion  for 
the  great  strife.  Melito's  books  on  the  Quartodeci- 
man  side  are  lost,  but  we  have  preserved  to  us  two 
little  fragments  of  a  work  written  by  Claudius 
Apolinarius,  bishop  of  the  Phrygian  Hierapolis,  six 
miles  away  from  Laodicea.  He  seems  to  represent 
the  innovators  down  on  the  border,  who  wanted  to 
be  like  the  rest  of  the  world,  while  Melito  from 
Sardis,  seventy-seven  miles  up  in  the  interior,  does 
not  feel  the  pressure  of  any  world  but  his  own. 
Bishop  Claudius  is  inclined  to  carry  things  with  a 
high  hand,  as  controversalists  often  do,  in  condemn- 
ing nearly  the  whole  Church  of  his  province  as  ig- 
norant and  mistaken,  but  it  must  be  remembered 
that  they  in  turn  faulted  nearly  the  whole  Catholic 
Church,  so  that  the  temptation  to  be  disrespectful 
was  very  great. 

"There  are,  then,  "  he  says,  "  some  who  raise  dis- 
putes about  these  things  (though  their  conduct  is 
pardonable,  for  ignorance  is  no  subject  of  blame,  it 
rather  needs  further  instruction),  and  say  that  on 
the  fourteenth  day  the  Lord  ate  the  lamb  with  the 
disciples,  and  that  He  suffered  Himself  on  the  great 
day  of  unleavened  bread,  and  they  quote  Matthew 
as  speaking  in  accordance  with  their  view.  Where- 
fore their  notion  is  inconsistent  with   the   law,  and 


216  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  Gospels  seem,  according  to  them,  to    be  at  va- 
riance. " 

Our  writer  is  here  alluding  to  a  question  which 
still  divides  scholars, — whether  our  Lord  ate  the  Last 
Supper  by  anticipation  a  day  before  the  regular  time, 
and  died  Himself  on  Nisan  14,  at  the  time  of  the 
slaying  of  the  paschal  lambs  for  that  year,  or  rather 
ate  the  Passover  according  to  rule,  observing  the 
type  of  His  own  death,  just  as  He  had  in  years  be- 
fore, obeying  the  law  on  Thursday  and  fulfilling  it 
on  Friday.  The  Synoptic  Gospels  taken  alone 
would  certainly  suggest  the  latter  idea,  that  our 
Lord  ate  a  real  Passover  on  the  night  that  followed 
the  slaying  of  the  lambs,  and  died  the  next  after- 
noon. Some  passages  in  the  Gospel  according  to 
St.  John  are  taken  as  implying  the  other  idea.  Now 
Claudius  Apolinarius  knew  of  the  presence  of  these 
two  opposite  notions  in  the  Church  as  long  ago  as 
his  times,  and  was  perfectly  sure  that  our  Lord  suf- 
fered on  the  fourteenth  day,  and  that  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  St.  John  said  so.  But  it  is  a  noticeable 
fact  that  he  ascribes  the  other  idea  of  the  story  to  his 
opponents  of  the  Quartodecirnan  party.  Though 
he  says  that  according  to  them  the  Gospels  were  at 
variance,  we  m&y  be  very  sure  that  they  had  an  in- 
terpretation which  made  the  Gospels  agree.  Hence 
we  gain  from  Bishop  Claudius  the  assurance  that 
the  very  people  among  whom  St.  John  ended  his 
days,  and  who  cherished  his  memory  with  most  pride, 
regarded  his  Gospel  as  meaning  that  our  Lord  ate  a 
real  Passover,  and  died  on  Nisan  15,  the  view  which 


Another  Fragment  from   Claudius.  217 

has  on  the  whole  prevailed  in  the  Church.1  In  say- 
ing that  our  Lord  did  not  eat  any  Passover  in  that 
last  year  of  His  life,  the  bishop  of  Hierapolis  was 
probably  much  mistaken,  but  we  can  better  sym- 
pathize with  him  in  the  argument  of  his  other  re- 
maining paragraph,  where  he  is  setting  forth,  appar- 
ently, that  our  Lord  fulfilled  in  Himself  all  that 
the  Passover  ever  meant.     It  runs  on   this  wise  : 

u[He  is]  the  fourteenth  day,  the  true  Passover  of 
the  Lord,  the  great  Sacrifice,  the  Son  of  God  instead 
of  the  lamb.  He  that  was  bound,  and  bound  the 
strong  man,  judged,  though  Judge  of  quick  and 
dead,  given  up  into  the  hands  of  sinners  to  be  cruci- 
fied ;  He  that  was  lifted  up  on  the  horns  of  the  uni- 
corn, and  pierced  in  His  holy  side ;  He  that  shed  out 
of  His  side  the  two  elements  that  restore  cleansing, 
water  and  blood,  Word  and  Spirit,  and  was  buried 
on  the  day  of  the  Passover,  with  a  stone  laid  on  His 
tomb." 

It  would  be  interesting,  but  perhaps  not  historical, 
to  guess  what  Claudius  meant  by  allegorizing  the 
water  and  blood  from  our  Lord's  side  into  "  Word 
and  Spirit."  We  can  stay  but  to  note  that  this 
second  stage  of  controversy  is  one  of  argument  on 
supposed  grounds  of  principle,  and  that  it  indicates 
a  certain  sharpening  of  temper  to  mention  publicly 
that  one's  opponents  are  pardonable,  and  so  pass  on 
to  the  third  stage.  It  was  some  twenty-five  years  in 
coming,  and  it  seems  to  have  been  brought  on  by 

'Dr.  Edersheim,  learned  in  Jewish  tradition,  takes  the  same 
view  as  to  the  day  of  our  Lord's  suffering,  (Life  and  Times  of 
Jesus  the  3Iessiah,  ii,  567,  568). 


218  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

Victor,  consecrated  as  bishop  of  the  Roman  Chris- 
tians, A.  D.  188  or  189.  We  hear  of  numerous 
councils  of  bishops  about  this  time,  representing 
various  districts,  and  all  urging  unanimity  in  obey- 
ing the  common  rule.  Some  one,  probably  the  new 
bishop  of  Rome,  had  been  asking  for  united  action 
and  fresh  pressure,  but  the  Churches  of  "Asia" 
stood  firm.  Mild  measures  failing,  Victor,  as 
bishop  of  the  leading  city  of  the  world,  undertook 
to  lead  the  way  into  a  new  course  of  action.  He 
announced  his  intention  of  cutting  off  from  Christian 
fellowship  all  Churches  which  should  continue  to 
observe  the  Quartodeciman  Easter.  Their  clergy 
were  not  to  be  granted  an}r  privileges  at  Rome,  nor 
would  any  clergyman  from  Rome  minister  at  any 
of  their  schismatic  altars.  The  members  of  such 
Churches  were  not  even  to  be  admitted  to  Commun- 
ion, if  they  came  to  Rome,  nor  Roman  Christians  al- 
lowed to  receive  the  Sacrament  from  them  when 
abroad.  It  was  the  first  time  that  such  a  threat  had 
been  uttered.  A  single  bishop  here  or  there  might 
have  fallen  into  heresy  or  immorality,  and  his  fel- 
low-bishops might  have  had  to  warn  the  flock  that 
the  Church's  communion  was  withdrawn  from  him, 
and  from  all  that  should  cling  to  him  under  such  a 
condemnation.  But  that  the  Church  of  one  prov- 
ince should  refuse  its  fellowship  to  the  Church  of 
another  province  was  a  thing  unknown. 

What  was  the  effect  of  such  a  pronouncement  on 
the  part  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  ?  As  regards  what 
Victor  was  aiming  at,  it  was  simply  nil.  The  prov- 
ince of  Asia  did  not  change    its  paschal    use   one 


Directions  from  Rome  not  Binding.  219 

hair's  breadth  till  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Nicsen, 
180  years  later.  That  council,  with  its  300  bishops 
gathered  from  all  the  Christian  world,  calling  the 
Church  to  assert  its  unbroken  unity  against  Arian- 
ism,  and  at  the  same  time  making  that  unity  to  be 
felt  with  a  sudden  passion  of  joy  and  pride  and 
thankfulness,  as  it  had  never  been  before,  decreed 
that  the  Christian  Easter  must  be  one  everywhere, 
and  laid  down  a  rule  for  it,  and  then  the  stubborn 
minority  gave  way.  Even  so  the  historian  Eusebius 
wrote  it  down  that  only  God  and  the  Emperor  Con- 
stantine  could  have  accomplished  this  blessed  result. 
Certainly,  Victor  carried  off  no  victory. 

Yet  in  another  direction  this  vain  pronouncement 
was  most  effective.  It  brought  out  clearly  for  all 
men  to  read  in  after  times  that  the  Catholic  Church 
of  the  second  century  knew  nothing  of  any  papacy. 
The  bishop  of  Rome  urged  the  bishops  of  a  certain 
province  to  conform  to  a  nearly  universal  custom  of 
the  Church.  They  stiffly  refused.  He  threatened 
them  with  excommunication,  and  they  paid  no  atten- 
tion to  the  threat.  But  the  Christian  world  gener- 
ally was  not  shocked  at  their  paying  so  little  heed 
to  the  Roman  bishop.  It  was  shocked  at  the  Roman 
bishop  for  using  such  a  wicked  threat  to  enforce  an 
attempt  to  invade  men's  Christian  liberty.  Poly- 
crates,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  presiding  in  the  council 
of  his  province,  wrote  to  Victor  in  the  name  of  his 
brother  bishops  a  manly  letter  in  which  the  sense  of 
perfect  equality  with  the  bishop  of  Rome  and  entire 
independence  of  him  is  finely  blended  with  a  scru- 
pulous courtesy  of  utterance. 


220  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

"  We  observe,"  lie  says,  "  the  genuine  day,  neither 
adding  to  nor  taking  from  it.  For  in  Asia  great 
lights  have  fallen  asleep,  which  shall  rise  again  in 
the  day  of  the  Lord's  appearing,  when  He  shall 
come  with  glory  from  heaven,  and  raise  up  all  the 
saints :  Philip,  one  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  who 
sleeps  in  Hierapolis,  and  his  two  daughters  who 
grew  old  in  the  estate  of  virginity;  his  other 
daughter  also,  who  having  lived  her  life  in  the  Holy 
Spirit,  now  rests  likewise  at  Ephesus ;  John,  more- 
over, that  rested  on  the  bosom  of  our  Lord,  who 
bore  the  responsibility  of  priesthood,  wearing  the 
petalon, l  and  was  both  witness  and  teacher.  He 
fell  asleep  at  Ephesus.  Polycarp  also,  who  was  bishop 
and  martyr  at  Smyrna,  and  Thraseas,  bishop  and  mar- 
tyr from  Eumenia,  who  fell  asleep  at  Smyrna.  But 
why  should  I  mention  Sagaris,  bishop  and  martyr,  who 
fell  asleep  at  Laodicea?  and  still  further  the  blessed 
Papirius,  and  Melito,  the  eunuch  that  lived  his  life 
altogether  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  now  lies  at  Sarclis 
awaiting  the  visitation  of  the  Bishop  from  heaven, 
when  he  shall  rise  again  from  the  dead  ?  All  these 
observed  the  paschal  fourteenth  day  according  to  the 
Gospel,  in  no  respect  deviating,  but  following  the  rule 
of  faith.  And  so  do  I  also,  who  am  the  least  among 
you  all,  Polycrates,  according  to  the  tradition  of  my 
kinsfolk,  who  are  among  those  that  I  have  followed. 

'The  petalon  was  the  golden  plate  on  the  front  of  the  high- 
priest's  mitre,  bearing  the  words,  "  Holiness  unto  the  Lord."  It 
is  questioned  whether  St.  John  really  did  wear  a  mitre  like  the 
Jewish  high-priests,  to  assert  his  claim  to  he  the  holder  of  a  simi- 
lar office  in  the  Christian  Israel,  or  whether  Polycrates  meant 
only  to  say  in  a  highly  figurative  fashion  that  St.  John  did  hold 
such  an  office. 


Victor's  Attempt  at  Wholesale  Excommunication.  221 

For  seven  of  my  kinsfolk  were  bishops,  and  I  am 
the  eighth,  and  always  my  kinsfolk  kept  the  day 
when  the  Jews  threw  away  the  leaven.  I,  therefore, 
brethren,  having  lived  sixty-five  years  in  the  Lord, 
and  met  with  brethren  from  all  over  the  world,  and 
gone  through  all  Holy  Scripture,  am  not  terrified  by 
your  words  of  fear.  For  some  that  are  greater  than 
I  have  said,  'We  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than 
men.'  I  might  make  mention,"  he  adds,  "  of  the 
bishops  that  attended,  whom  you  desired  me  to  sum- 
mon (and  I  did  so),  whose  names,  if  I  should  write 
them,  would  be  a  multitude ;  who  recognizing  my 
personal  insignificance,  gave  their  assent  to  my  let- 
ter, knowing  that  I  do  not  bear  a  hoary  head  for 
nought,  but  have  lived  my  life  always  in  the  Lord 
Jesus." 

"  Thereupon,"  says  Eusebius,  "  Victor,  the  chief  of 
the  Romans,  attempts  to  cut  off  from  the  common 
unity  as  heterodox  the  parishes  of  all  Asia  in  a  body, 
together  with  the  Churches  in  their  neighborhood, 
and  he  placards  them  by  letters,  proclaiming  all  the 
brethren  in  that  region  utterly  excommunicate." 
This  loud  and  ambitious  proclamation  is  spoken  of 
as  an  "  attempt."  It  certainly  does  not  mean  that 
Victor  thought  of  excommunicating  the  Churches 
of  "Asia,"  and  gave  it  up.  No!  He  really  did 
send  letters  and  "  placard  "  them  as  "  utterly  excom- 
municate." But  this  was  an  "attempt,"  because 
when  he  had  done  all,  he  had  done  nothing.  Neither 
the  bishop  of  Rome  nor  any  other  bishop  could  cut 
off  whole  Churches  from  the  common  unity,  unless 
the  Churches  of  the  common  unity  pretty  generally 


222  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

agreed  with  him.  It  did  not  make  so  very  much  dif- 
ference to  Ephesus  that  Rome  would  not  communi- 
cate with  her,  if  Gaul  and  Africa  and  Egypt  and  Syria 
and  Mesopotamia  and  Cilicia  and  Pontus  and  Achaia 
all  came  round,  and  said,  "  It  is  not  right,  and  we 
shall  communicate  with  you  just  the  same."  That 
is  what  most  of  the  bishops  seem  to  have  done. 
"  Words  of  theirs  are  extant,"  says  Eusebius,  "  sharply 
rebuking  Victor."  It  is  the  more  notable,  because 
in  the  original  controversy  nearly  the  whole  Chris- 
tian world  was  with  Victor.  The  Churches  gener- 
ally thought  "  Asia"  was  behaving  badly,  but  when 
the  Roman  bishop  proposed  to  excommunicate  a  for- 
eign Church,  they  refused  to  follow  his  lead.  The 
spokesman  of  the  Catholic  position,  and  real  leader 
of  the  Church's  thought,  was  Irenasus,  bishop  of 
Lyons,  who  sent  out  letters  in  the  name  of  his  pro- 
vincial council  of  bishops,  urging  that  the  feast  of 
the  Lord's  resurrection  should  everywhere  be  kept 
on  the  Lord's  Da)r,  but  also  "  admonishing  Victor 
that  he  should  not  cut  off  whole  Churches  of  God, 
which  observed  the  tradition  of  an  ancient  custom." 
"  For  the  controversy,"  said  this  wise  man,  well 
worthy  of  his  beautiful  name  of  Irenseus,  "the  man 
of  peace," — "the  controversy  is  not  only  concerning 
the  day,  but  also  concerning  the  very  manner  of  the 
fast.  For  some  think  that  they  should  fast  one  day, 
others  two,  yet  others  more  ;  some,  moreover,  count 
their  day  as  consisting  of  forty  hours,  day  and  night. 
And  this  variety  in  its  observance  has  not  originated 
in  our  time,  but  long  before,  in  that  of  our  ances- 
tors, who  probably  did  not  have  very  exact  rules,  and 


Festal  Epistles  Sent  from  Alexandria.         223 

so  made  a  custom  for  their  posterity  according  to 
their  own  simplicity  and  individual  notions.  Yet  all 
of  these  lived  none  the  less  in  peace,  and  we  also 
live  in  peace  with  one  another,  and  the  disagreement 
in  regard  to  the  fast  confirms  the  agreement  in  the 
faith"  (Uusebius  v.  24). 

At  the  Council  of  Nicsea  the  rule  was  made  which 
still  obtains,  that  Easter  shall  be  the  Sunday  next 
following  the  full  moon  which  falls  upon,  or  next 
after,  the  day  of  the  vernal  equinox,  now  reckoned 
to  be  the  twenty-first  day  of  March.  Even  this  rule 
was  not  quite  an  end  of  controversy.  The  astro- 
nomical science  of  those  days  could  not  make  calen- 
dars that  would  last  many  years  without  getting  out 
of  order.  Churches  might  differ  as  to  the  day  of  the 
vernal  equinox,  and  as  to  the  day  of  the  full  moon. 
Thus,  when  the  conversion  of  Saxon  England  was  in 
progress,  the  Celtic  missionaries  from  Scotland  were 
called  Quartodecimans  by  the  missionaries  from 
Rome  and  Gaul,  because  they  reckoned  the  fourteenth 
day  from  the  new  moon  as  the  day  of  full  moon, 
while  the  common  custom  of  the. Church  was  to  take 
the  fifteenth  day.  For  many  years  after  the  Council 
of  Nicsea  it  was  the  custom  for  the  bishops  of  Alex- 
andria, a  city  famous  for  its  astronomers,  to  send  out 
what  were  called  "Festal  Epistles"  year  by  year,  an- 
nouncing on  what  day  Easter  was  to  be  kept.  Of 
course,  it  was  a  matter  of  great  convenience  to  ac- 
cept some  one  man's  calculation,  right  or  wrong, 
rather  than  to  leave  different  people  to  pronounce 
different  judgments  and  throw  the  Church  into  dis- 
cord once  more  ;  but  let  us  imagine  what  would  have 


224  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

been  made  of  it,  if  the  bishops  of  Rome  had  been 
entrusted  with  this  office,  of  telling  all  the  other 
Churches  of  Christendom  when  they  should  keep 
their  Easter  feast.  It  may  be  added  that  the  Greek, 
Russian,  and  all  the  Oriental  Churches,  not  having 
received  what  is  known  as  the  Gregorian  calendar, 
are  twelve  days  behind  us  in  their  reckoning,  their 
April  20,  for  instance,  being  our  May  2,  and  their 
December  25  our  January  6,  while  they  also  differ 
from  us  as  to  the  place  of  the  vernal  equinox  in  the 
year.  Roman  and  Anglican  Christians  have  one 
Easter  everywhere,  which  cannot  fall  earlier  than 
March  22,  nor  later  than  April  25. 

II.  Montanism.  In  the  Quartodeciman  controversy 
the  storm-centre  lay  over  the  province  of  Asia.  While 
that  controversy  was  in  the  first  heat  of  discussion, 
there  arose  in  the  same  region  another  difficulty  more 
painful  and  perilous  by  far.  It  was  the  movement 
called  by  modern  writers  Montanism,  from  the  name 
of  its  founder,  Montanus,  but  known  in  its  own  day 
as  the  Phrygian  (or  Cataphrygian)  Heresy.  The  older 
name  suggests  a  difficulty  which  besets  missionary 
work  in  every  age.  Real  success  in  Christianizing  a 
people  can  come  only  through  respecting  the  genius 
of  that  people  and  giving  it  free  play.  Early  Greek 
Christianity  must  have  a  different  tone  from  early 
Roman  Christianity,  and  either  of  them  from  modern 
English  Christianity,  just  as  it  is  reasonable  and 
necessary  that  Japanese  Christianity  should  grow  to 
have  a  very  different  tone  from  that  of  the  American 
and  English  missionaries  that  carried  the  Gospel 
there.     And  yet  there  are  limits  to  be  observed  by 


Characteristics  of  the  Phrygians.  '  225 

wise  leaders.  A  degraded  people  will  want  to  make 
an  amalgam  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  and  their  own 
degradations.  A  people  trained  up  in  a  false  philoso- 
phy will  be  in  great  danger  of  corrupting  the  Gos- 
pel of  Christ  into  a  false  theology.  Changing  Christ's 
religion  to  meet  national  prejudices  is  not  to  adapt  it 
to  national  needs. 

Now  the  Phrygians  were  one  of  the  most  peculiar 
peoples  that  Christianity  encountered  in  its  first  three 
centuries.  Originally  a  race  of  warriors,  carving  out 
for  themselves  a  considerable  kingdom  in  the  midst  of 
Asia  Minor,  they  had  fallen  into  effeminate  weak- 
ness, and  become  the  prey  of  a  series  of  conquests  in 
their  turn,  till  "Phrygia"  had  come  to  be  a  term  of 
no  significance  whatever  politically,  and  of  doubtful 
meaning  geographically,1  and  the  name  of  "  Phryg- 
ian "  had  come  to  be  a  synonym  for  "  slave."  It  is 
reasonable  to  believe  that  the  religion  of  Phrygia 
had  something  to  do  with  the  degradation  of  its 
people.  It  was  a  nature-worship,  regarding  life  per- 
petually reproducing  itself  as  the  great  divine  fact  of 
the  universe,  and  the  process  of  generation  as  the 
great,  constant  triumph  over  the  archenemy,  death. 
The  earth,  the  great  sustainer  of  all  life,  was  deified 
by  them,  as  the  Great  Mother,  ready  to  receive  and 
quicken  the  seed  of  every  sower.  Under  whatever 
name,  as  Leto,  Cybele,  Demeter,  Artemis,  she  was  a 

1  Professor  Ramsay  seems  to  have  shown  {Church  in  the  Roman 
Empire  before  A.  D.  170,  pp.  74-81)  that  the  name  Phrygia  cov- 
ered in  St.  Paul's  day  a  district  in  the  southeastern  part  of  the 
province  of  Asia  and  some  small  part  of  the  province  of  Galatia. 
Iconium  (Acts  xiii.  51 ;  xiv.  1)  was  a  Phrygian  town  geograph- 
ically, and  Lystra  and  Derbe  (Acts  xiv.  6)  were  cities  of  Lycaonia ; 
but  all  were  of  the  province  of  Galatia  politically. 


226  The  Post -Apostolic  Age. 

Goddess  of  Liberty,  as  knowing  no  law  but  that  of  na- 
ture, no  restraint  but  that  of  force.  Her  worship  was  a 
debauchery,  her  priestesses  were  consecrated  to  prosti- 
tution, the  one  thing  forbidden  them  as  an  impurity 
in  their  term  of  service  being  the  relation  of  lawful 
marriage,  which  might  imply  a  restraint  upon  the 
freedom  of  the  goddess  in  her  servants.1  The  Phryg- 
ian liberty  was  a  freedom  from  order  and  law.  It 
taught  men  to  cultivate  every  natural  passion  and 
emotion  rather  than  to  restrain  it.  It  produced  a 
people  degraded  by  dissipation  from  the  standing  of 
a  tribe  of  conquerors  to  the  level  of  a  feeble  folk, 
emotional,  excitable,  hysterical.  The  Southern  Ne- 
gro of  the  United  States,  with  his  passion  for  free- 
dom, his  actual  servility,  his  low  moral  standards, 
his  intense  religiousness,  his  curious  insensibility  to 
the  connection  between  religion  and  morals,  his 
emotionalism,  his  love  of  that  sort  of  nervous  excite- 
ment that  comes  only  to  human  beings  acting  upon 
one  another  in  a  crowd,  his  sensitiveness  to  the 
charms  of  music,  and  running  through  all,  the  tinge 
of  bitterness  that  comes  to  a  race  that  knows  itself 
regarded  as  inferior,  may  serve  to  give  the  modern 
reader  some  idea  of  what  the  Phrygian  race  was  like 
seventeen  centuries  ago. 

When  Christianity  began  to  make  its  way  among 
such  a  people,  it  was  of  necessity  that  they  should 


1  It  is  sufficiently  curious  that  the  modern  notion  of  the  God- 
dess of  Liberty,  with  her  liberty-pole  and  liberty-cap,  the  last 
the  ancient  Phrygian  headdress,  was  adopted  in  the  tumult  of 
the  French  Revolution,  aud  has  been  borrowed  by  later  Republics, 
from  this  Phrygian  worship  of  licentious  lawlessness  under  the 
name  of  freedom. 


Prophesyings  Attractive  to  the  Phrygian  Temper.  227 

be  particularly  interested  in  two  of  its  features,  its 
prophesyings  and  its  speaking  with  tongues.  There 
is  reason  to  believe  that  these  were  tremendous 
emotional  experiences.  "  The  spirits  of  the  prophets 
are  subject  to  the  prophets,"  says  St.  Paul  (1  Cor. 
xiv.  32),  but  that  very  warning  implies  the  existence 
of  persons  who  needed  it,  because,  when  such  a 
power  seized  them,  they  did  not  try  to  control  them- 
selves, but  abandoned  themselves  to  excited  feeling. 
"  If  it  is  a  divine  power,  why  should  we  not  give  up 
ourselves  to  it?"  says  the  Phrygian  temper.  St. 
Paul's  answer  would  plainly  have  been,  "Because 
your  power  is  given  to  exalt  your  whole  being,  reason 
and  judgment  and  conscience  as  well  as  feeling,  and 
if  you  give  yourself  to  follow  feeling  alone,  you  will 
be  giving  up  the  divine  guidance,  and  using  heavenly 
powers  without  heavenly  direction."  The  Phrygian 
temper  was  singularly  unready  to  learn  that  lesson. 
It  had  a  craving  for  unregulated  excitement.  It 
loved  the  display  of  power  better  than  its  restraint. 
To  such  a  temper  the  gradual  failure  of  "prophesy- 
ings "  and  "  tongues  "  out  of  the  Church's  life  would 
be  a  sore  trial.  What  more  likely  than  that  among 
such  a  people  there  should  be  a  straining  after  the 
prophetic  exaltation,  abuse  of  it  where  it  was  genu- 
inely bestowed,  stubborn  unwillingness  to  do  with- 
out it,  and  hence  artificial  imitations  of  the  divine 
gift  resulting  from  mere  human  excitements,  and 
finally  an  imperious  demand  that  whatever  came  to 
these  self-willed  manufacturers  of  prophecy  should 
be  accepted  as  a  message  of  God  to  the  Church? 
Amid  such  conditions,  somewhat  after  the  middle 


228  The  Post-Apostohc  Age. 

of  the  second  century, — it  must  have  been  after  the 
death  of  Polycarp,  or  we  should  have  his  great  au- 
thority quoted  in  some  connection  with  the  strife, — 
the  Churches  of  "  Asia  "  began  to  be  agitated  by  the 
alleged  revelations  given  out  by  one  Montanus,  a 
somewhat  recent  convert  to  Christianity,  but  for- 
merly, if  we  may  trust  writers  living  two  centuries 
afterward,  a  eunuch  priest  of  Cybele.  Of  heresy,  in 
the  modern  meaning  of  the  word,  there  was  none  in 
his  prophesyings.  He  accepted  faithfully  the  Chris- 
tian faith  of  the  past,  but  he  proclaimed  the  open  • 
ing  of  a  new  dispensation.  That  of  Moses  had  been 
succeeded  by  that  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  now 
a  yet  more  glorious  day  was  dawning.  There  was 
to  be  a  dispensation  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  prom- 
ised Paraclete  had  not  fully  come  heretofore.  Now 
He  was  beginning  to  speak  freely  and  was  to  raise 
the  Church  to  new  and  larger  life.  The  flame  of 
this  prophetic  frenzy  spread.  Two  women,  Priscilla 
and  Maximilla,  left  their  husbands  and  joined  Mon- 
tanus, to  be  enrolled  with  the  honorable  title  of 
"  virgins  "  among  his  followers.  Under  the  leader- 
ship of  these  three  there  grew  up  a  movement  of 
really  dangerous  magnitude. 

Not  that  the  things  propounded  as  new  revelations 
were  very  bad,  or  very  important,  in  themselves. 
That  two  more  fasts  were  to  be  kept  in  the  Church's 
year  besides  that  which  we  know  as  Lent,  that  the 
fasts  of  Wednesday  and  Friday  should  run  till  sun- 
set instead  of  mid-afternoon,  that  second  marriages 
should  be  absolutely  forbidden  to  Christians,  that 
persons  excommunicated  for  certain  grave  offences 


Was  the   Christian  Revelation  Final?        229 

should  never  be  restored  to  the  Church's  fellowship 
in  this  life,  these  might  be  unhealthy  developments 
in  the  Church's  evolution,  but  it  would  have  been 
much  more  unhealthy  for  the  Church  to  condemn 
any  man  for  preaching  that  such  regulations  were 
desirable.  Obviously,  the  question  was  a  far  deeper 
one  than  that.  If  the  Holy  Spirit  spake  through 
Montanus  in  his  ecstasies,  then  the  whole  Church 
must  submit — not  to  this  or  that  particular  proposal, 
but — to  whatever  Montanus  or  his  prophetesses 
might  say  hereafter.  Was  the  Church  left  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  with  a  full  and  final  revelation  of 
necessary  beliefs,  which  it  had  only  to  preserve  and 
study,  and  growingly  to  appreciate,  or  with  an  im- 
perfect and  insufficient  revelation,  waiting  to  be  en- 
larged by  special  revelations  given  from  time  to  time 
to  favored  teachers  ?  Was  the  Church  left  by  Jesus 
Christ  with  full  power  and  authority  to  govern  itself, 
subject  to  certain  laws  and  rules  laid  down  before- 
hand for  the  Apostles'  guidance,  and  expected  to 
meet  the  responsibilities  of  its  future  growth  by 
the  use  of  its  best  judgment,  but  always  with  a  liability 
to  make  mistakes  ?  Or  was  the  Church  left  to  wait 
upon  the  testimonies  of  persons  who  had  abdicated 
reason  and  self-control,  that  from  such  unregulated 
utterances  it  might  learn  to  regulate  itself?  The 
wise  answer  reached  by  the  Church  of  the  second 
century  was  practically  this  :  We  are  not  to  expect 
from  Almighty  God  any  further  revelations,  whether 
of  truth  or  of  duty,  rising  above  the  level  of  sugges- 
tions offered  to  the  Church's  conscience.  The  prophet 
who  professes  to  have  received  any  new  truth,  or 


230  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

any  new  law,  wherewith  to  limit  the  freedom  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  stands  self-condemned.  So  one 
may  interpret  the  Church's  condemnation  of  Mon- 
tanus. 

Another  point  settled  for  the  Catholic  Church 
was  that  a  prophet  must  not  speak  in  an  ecstasy. 
This  was  a  great  word  with  the  followers  of  Montanus. 
It  was  a  Greek  word,  implying  that  a  man  was 
"moved  out  of  himself."  Naturally,  it  had  a  wide 
range  of  meaning.  It  could  be  used  to  express 
"amazement,"  as  in  the  Greek  translation  of  Ps. 
xxxi.  22,  cxvi.  11,  (Prayer  Book  Version,  xxxi.  24, 
cxvi.  10),  where  the  King  James  Version  gives,  "  I 
said  in  my  haste."  It  might  represent  a  swoon  ox- 
some  other  loss  of  consciousness,  as  in  the  LXX 
Version  of  Gen.  ii.  21,  where  it  stands  for  what  we 
call  "a  deep  sleep. "  It  might  be  used  of  a  spiritual 
exaltation  such  as  St.  John  must  have  had,  when  he 
was  "  in  the  Spirit,"  and  saw  visions  of  God.  Again, 
it  might  be  used  of  a  man  beside  himself.  The 
Montanists  insisted  on  giving  it  the  meaning  of  a 
frenzy,  such  as  their  prophets  indulged  in,  in  which 
a  man  lost  all  control  of  himself.  A  prophet  had  no 
freedom  in  their  view,  and  no  responsibility.  He 
was  like  a  musical  instrument,  of  which  the  Holy 
Spirit  swept  the  strings  and  played  what  melody  He 
would.  Then  said  the  Church,  " No  prophet  of 
God  has  any  right  to  speak  in  such  a  condition  as 
that.  The  sprits  of  the  prophets  must  be  subject  to 
the  prophets,  always  and  everywhere." 

This  decision  seems  sober  and  wise,  it  is  interest- 
ing as  showing  what  the  Church  believed  concerning 


The  Prophesyings  Ascribed  to  Evil  Spirits.    231 

the  inspiration  and  the  freedom  of  the  Old  Testament 
writers,  and  it  seems  to  represent  exactly  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Church's  leaders  in  the  century  before.1 
In  one  point,  however,  the  line  taken  by  the  authori- 
ties is  regrettable.  They  condemned  the  "  prophesy  - 
ings  "  as  the  work  of  evil  spirits.  Probably  such  an 
opinion  was  inevitable  at  that  time.  The  boundaries 
between  natural  and  supernatural  workings  of  the 
human  mind  were  little  understood.  Most  men  felt 
obliged  to  find  the  cause  of  an  ecstasy  in  some  out- 
side power.  If  it  was  not  of  God,  it  must  be  of 
Satan.  We  of  to-day  can  see  two  other  alternatives. 
These  ravings  may  have  been  purely  human  utter- 
ances. It  was  all  a  matter  of  self  delusion.  Again, 
it  is  quite  possible  that  some  of  these  people  may 
have  had  a  real  gift  of  God,  and  abused  it  through 
misunderstanding  of  the  divine  order,  with  a  ming- 

1  Some  modern  writers  regard  Montanus  as  a  conservative  trying 
to  maintain  the  old  simplicity  of  the  Church  against  a  party  of 
successful  innovators.  Prophesying  in  an  ecstasy,  they  would 
say,  had  been  a  common  thing  in  the  earlier  days.  Just  now  the 
rising  priestly  caste  were  trying  to  put  down  the  old  freedom  of 
prophesying.  Montanus  represents  the  old-fashioned  Christians 
who  did  not  like  ecclesiasticism.  The  answer  to  this  suggestion  is 
twofold.  First,  it  is  true  that  in  St.  Paul's  day  prophets  spoke 
"in  an  ecstasy,"  but  the  word  "  ecstasy  "  meant  for  them  a  spir- 
itual exaltation,  not  a  foaming,  hysterical,  irrational  fit.  "Sub- 
ject to  the  prophets."  That  saying  marks  the  difference  between 
prophesyings  under  St.  Paul  and  prophesyings  under  Montanus. 
Secondly,  Montanus  himself,  so  far  from  being  an  opposer  of  what 
is  called  ecclesiasticism,  was  particularly  fond  of  it.  When  he 
and  his  followers  were  cut  off  from  the  communion  of  the  Church, 
they  had  what  they  considered  revelations,  bidding  them  to  set 
up  a  new  Church,  and  to  found  a  holy  city,  to  be  the  beginning 
of  the  New  Jerusalem  on  earth,  in  a  little  Phrygian  village  called 
Pepuza.  There  they  had  a  Patriarch,  centuries  before  such  a  title 
was  anywhere  used  in  the  Catholic  body,  and  officers  called 
Cenones,  whatever  that  may  mean,  besides  the  bishops  and  presby- 
ters and  deacons  of  the  older  order. 


232  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

ling  of  vanity  and  self-will.  If  the  spirit  of  a  real 
prophet  is  always  subject  to  the  prophet,  it  follows 
that  in  any  age  a  genuine  gift  of  inspiration  may  be 
used  very  much  amiss.  But  the  mind  of  the  second 
century  was  apt  to  see  no  alternative  but  to  accept 
these  prophets  as  heavenly  guides,  or  to  disown  them 
as  instruments  of  Satan. 

Of  course  this  unjust  dilemma  drove  some  men 
into  Montanism.  They  knew  that  certain  good 
men  and  women  were  not  victims  of  evil  spirits. 
Therefore  they  had  to  take  them  as  messengers  of 
God.  But  Catholic  Christians  were  ready  to  believe 
much  evil  of  Montanism  in  the  centres  of  its  power. 
Some  of  the  bishops  wanted  permission  to  exorcise 
Priscilla  and  Maximilla,  fully  believing  that  they 
were  demoniacs,  and  that  their  evil  spirits  might 
be  cast  out.  Catholics  shut  up  in  prison  with  Mon- 
tanists  in  times  of  persecution  refused  to  recognize 
them  as  fellow  Christians.  It  was  said  that  their 
leaders  professed  extraordinary  asceticism  and  prac- 
tised extraordinary  luxury,  that  some  of  their  proph- 
ets and  prophetesses  came  to  dreadful  ends,  as 
by  suicide,  that  no  prophet  of  theirs  ever  became  a 
martyr.1  This  last  statement  is  probably  true, 
coming  from  a  nearly  contemporary  writer  who 
would  hardly  have  dared  to  put  forth  such  a  defi- 
nite statement,    when    contradiction  was  certain  to 

'This,  and  not  that  no  Montanist  ever  became  a  martyr,  is  the 
statement  of  the  anonymous  author  quoted  by  Eusebius  (v.  16). 
And  he  is  careful  enough  to  say  that  it  was  reported  that  Mon- 
tanus  and  Maximilla  were  suicides.  Dr.  McGiffert  seems  not 
quite  fair  to  the  ancient  writer,  in  saying  that  he  cares  noth- 
ing for  the  truth.  How  do  we  know  that  what  he  says  is  not 
true,  every  word  of  it  ? 


Montanist  Leaders  Appeal  for  Recognition.    233 

follow,  if  it  was  false.  And  furthermore,  the  combi- 
nation of  a  very  strict  discipline  with  a  great  deal  of 
self-indulgence  in  matters  lying  outside  of  the  rule 
has  nothing  very  improbable  about  it.  Neither  has 
the  running  out  of  a  career  of  unrestrained  emo- 
tional excitement  into  melancholia,  insanity,  and 
suicide.  But  that  Montanism  had  a  following  of 
noble  and  holy  souls,  we  shall  find  full  proof. 

The  original  leaders  in  the  movement  may  safely 
be  set  down  as  perfectly  honest  self-deceivers. 
When  they  were  excommunicated  by  the  local 
bishops,  they  appealed  boldly,  and  probably  with 
full  expectation  of  a  favorable  hearing,  to  the 
Church  at  large.  It  was  in  the  year  177,  the  first 
date  that  we  can  feel  quite  sure  of  in  this  story, 
that  memorable  year  when  the  martyrs  of  Lyons 
and  Vienne  were  going  through  their  fiery  trial, 
that  two  communications  came  to  Eleutherus,  bishop 
of  Rome.  One  was  a  petition  from  the  followers  of 
Montanus  asking  the  Church  of  the  chief  city  of 
Christendom  to  recognize  them  rather  than  their 
adversaries  as  truly  representing  the  Catholic 
Church  in  the  Asian  province;  the  other  was  a  let- 
ter from  the  martyr  Churches  of  Southern  Gaul, 
begging  him  not  to  disturb  the  Church's  peace  by 
offering  the  fellowship  of  the  great  Roman  Church 
to  persons  whom  the  bishops  of  Asia  had  con- 
demned. So  we  must  understand  the  statement  of 
Eusebius  (v.  3),  that  these  Churches  sent  letters  to 
Asia  and  Phrygia,  and  also  to  Rome,  expressing  "a 
very  prudent  and  orthodox  judgment,"  and  "  negotia- 
ting   for  the    peace   of  the   Churches."     No   action 


234  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

that  granted  the  least  favor  to  Montanus  could  have 
seemed  to  Eusebius  either  orthodox  or  prudent,  so 
the  endeavor  to  secure  the  peace  of  the  Church 
must  have  been  an  endeavor  to  save  the  Roman 
bishop  from  putting  himself  in  opposition  to  the 
bishops  immediately  concerned. 

This  plea  of  the  Montanists  for  recognition  was 
no  "appeal  to  Rome"  in  the  modern  sense.  It 
was  only  one,  we  may  be  sure,  out  of  many  such 
appeals,  sent  out  to  the  great  Church  centres.  All 
grave  divisions  among  Christians  resulted  naturally 
in  such  appeals  as  this.  It  was  never  part  of  the 
discipline  of  the  ancient  Church  to  assume  that  ma- 
jorities are  right,  nor  yet  that  authorities  are  right. 
The  Roman  province,  and  every  other  province,  had 
its  own  responsibility  for  deciding  as  well  as  it 
could,  to  which  of  these  parties  in  the  Asian  prov- 
ince it  should  give  its  fellowship.  A  distant  prov- 
ince might  reasonably  feel  a  good  deal  of  difficulty 
in  such  a  case  and  take  a  good  deal  of  time  to  make 
up  its  mind.  What  was  said  against  the  new  proph- 
esyings  depended  so  much  on  the  wisdom  of  the 
observer.  Who  could  say  whether  these  far-away 
bishops  who  condemned  the  movement  were  deeply 
wise  and  spiritual  men,  and  whether  Montanus  and 
the  women  had  been  deep  characters,  or  shallow 
characters,  before  this  experience  came  to  them  ? 
It  is  plain  that  the  Churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne 
felt  that  they  could  give  most  valuable  information 
on  such  points.  Their  leading  men  were  largely 
Greek  merchants  from  Asia,  who  knew  a  great  deal 
more  about  the  affairs  and  the  people  of  that  province 


The  Partial  Successes  of  Montanism.         235 

than  anybody  at  Rome  was  likely  to  know.  So  they 
sent  their  messenger  with  information  and  advice, 
and  their  advice  prevailed.  Eleutherus  joined  in 
pronouncing  the  exclusion  of  the  followers  of  Mon- 
tanus  from  the  Church.  Yet  the  question  was  evi- 
dently an  obscure  question  still.  Some  twenty-five  or 
thirty  years  later — it  seems  to  have  been  in  the 
episcopate  of  Zephyrinus,  the  successor  of  Victor, 
when  perhaps  the  Churches  of  Rome  and  Asia  were 
not  yet  on  good  terms  again  after  Victor's  excom- 
munication— Montanist  teachers  established  them- 
selves at  Rome,  and  persuaded  the  bishop  to  give 
them  "  letters  of  peace."  A  visitor  from  Asia,  Prax- 
eas,  of  whom  we  must  read  presently  as  an  arch- 
heretic,  brought  such  information  concerning  the 
movement  that  these  letters  were  soon  recalled. 

As  a  rival  Church  Montanism  continued  to  be  a 
power  in  Phrygia,  its  original  home,  till  the  middle 
of  the  sixth  century,  when  it  was  stamped  out  by 
the  orthodox  persecutor,  Justinian.  For  a  while, 
however,  in  some  provinces,  it  retained  its  place  as 
a  movement  within  the  Church,  and  even  drew 
some  eminent  Christians  into  its  service.  Chiefly 
was  this  true  of  the  province  of  Africa.  Tertullian, 
the  most  distinguished  presbyter  of  the  Church  of 
Carthage,  and  the  most  brilliant  and  dashing  writer 
of  his  day,  whose  eve^  utterance  was  like  a  cav- 
alry charge,  embraced  the  new  prophesyings  about 
A.  D.  200,  and  became  an  ardent,  and  even  bitter, 
advocate  of  Montanist  views.  Tertullian's  work  in 
the  Church  must  be  considered  in  the  next  chapter. 
It  must  suffice  to  add    here    that  Tertullian's  Mon- 


236  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

tanism  seems  to  have  run  a  course  much  like  John 
Wesley's  Methodism.  In  each  case  we  have  one  of 
the  most  powerful,  and  we  may  say,  inspired,  men 
of  the  day  appearing  as  a  leader  in  a  movement 
whose  inner  qualities  make  it  perfectly  inevitable 
that  it  should  separate  from  the  Catholic  body.  In 
each  case  the  great  man  himself  abhors  such  separa- 
tion, will  not  see  the  necessity  of  separation,  will 
not  be  a  party  to  separation,  yet  does  things  which 
really  tend  to  bring  it  about.  In  "each  case  the 
great  man  gets  the  credit  of  having  separated  from 
the  Church  of  his  baptism,  because  the  movement 
which  he  championed  did  so,  and  called  itself  by  his 
name.1  In  the  case  of  the  Wesleys,  however,  the  blun- 
der is  purely  popular.  It  does  not  appear  in  books 
by  careful  writers.  In  the  case  of  Tertullian,  on 
the  other  hand,  almost  all  scholars  speak  of  his  "  fall," 
his  "defection,"  "  the  Church  which  he  had  for- 
saken. "  Our  own  Dr.  Schaff  is  distinguished  as 
speaking  of  Tertullian's  adopting  Montanist  opin- 
ions "without  seceding  from  the  Church, "  and  de- 
claring boldly,  "he  was  not  excommunicated." 
(Church  History,  ii.  420).  Such  is  the  view  of  Dr. 
Salmon  also  (Diet.  Christ.  Biog.,  Art.  Montanus). 
But  whether  Tertullian  was,  or  was  not,  a  separat- 
ist in  his  later  days,  it  seems  certain  that  a  group 
of  martyrs  who  suffered  in  the  late  winter,  A.  D. 
203,  were  at  once   Montanist  in  opinion  and  Ca'tho- 

1  St.  Augustine  in  the  fifth  century  knew  a  Church  at  Car- 
thage which  had  belonged  to  the  "  Tertullianists,  "  and  which 
they  had  handed  over  to  the  Catholics,  when  the  last  of  them 
returned  to  the  unity  of  the  Church,  sometime  in  the  century 
before. 


The  First  Martyrs  of  North  Africa.         237 

lie  in  position.  The  story  of  Perpetua  and  Felic- 
itas  and  their  companions  cannot  be  passed  over 
in  the  Church's  roll  of  golden  deeds. 

When  North  Africa  received  Christianity  we  do 
not  know.  Its  "  archi-martyr,"  Namphamo,  whose 
barbarous  Punic  name  is  rendered  by  St.  Augustine 
Homo  boni  pedis, — in  English,  Gooclspeed, — suffered 
under  the  Proconsul  Vigellius  Saturninus,  who  went 
to  his  governorship  in  May,  180.  The  town  of 
Madaura  seems  to  have  sent  Namphamo  and  some 
others  to  join  the  white-robed  army.1  A  group  from 
the  town  of  Scilla — the  "  Acts  of  the  Scillitan 
Martyrs,"  may  still  be  read — suffered  in  the  same 
summer.  How  many  more,  no  man  knoweth.  Then 
the  Church  seems  to  have  had  rest  till  Severus  issued 
his  edict  forbidding  conversions  to  Christianity,  and 
personal  loyalty  to  the  Emperor  caused  the  law  to 
be  specially  enforced  in  "  Africa,"  the  province  of  his 
birth. 

It  was  in  February,  203,  that  a  group  of  new  con- 
verts, not  yet  baptized,  were  thrown  into  prison  at 
Carthage.  Two  of  them,  Revocatus  and  Felicitas, 
were  slaves,  and  two  again  were  of  noble  family, 
Vibia  Perpetua  and  her  younger  brother.  Perpetua 
herself  was  only  twenty-two,  but  a  mother  with  an 
infant  at  her  breast,  and  apparently  a  widow.  Her 
people  were  heathen.  From  them  came  no  help. 
They  only  tormented  her  with  entreaties  to  give  up 
her  delusion  and  save  herself.  She  had  had  her 
training  from  Christians  of  a  Montanist  type.     She 

1  "  Candidatus  martyrum  exercitus,"  is  the  original  of  the  "  noble 
army  of  martyrs  "  in  the  Te  Deum. 


238  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

had  learned  that  the  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  on  all 
flesh  should  enable  all  Christians  to  "  see  visions  " 
and  "  dream  dreams."  So  dreams  and  visions  came 
to  her.  What  shall  we  say  of  them  ?  Certainly,  she 
saw  and  heard  nothing  but  what  it  was  already  in 
her  heart  to  see  and  hear.  But  surely  we  may  say 
also  that  her  visions  were  a  gift  to  her  in  her  need 
from  God. 

For  a  few  days  they  were  in  the  outer  prison,  prob- 
ably enough  a  mere  stockaded  enclosure  with 
awnings  to  cover  some  portions  from  sun  or  rain.  In 
that  time  they  were  baptized,  and  "  To  me,"  says  Per- 
petua, — we  have  part  of  the  story  as  she  found  means 
to  write  it  down  herself, — "  To  me  the  Spirit  pre- 
scribed that  nothing  was  to  be  sought  in  the  water 
but  bodily  endurance.  After  a  few  days,"  she 
adds,  "  we  were  taken  into  the  dungeon,  and  I  was 
very  much  afraid,  because  I  had  never  felt  such  dark- 
ness." The  dungeon  of  a  Roman  prison  was  an 
awful  place.  We  hear  of  its  stifling  heat,  its  unre- 
lieved darkness,  its  intolerable,  sickening  stench,  its 
rats  and  vermin.  It  is  a  horror  happily  beyond  our 
imagining.  Two  deacons  were  allowed  to  visit  the 
prisoners,  and  a  money  payment  from  the  Church 
alms  secured  them  a  few  hours  in  the  open  courts 
every  day.  Perpetua's  brother  moved  her  to  ask  for 
a  revelation  whether  this  should  be  a  passion  or  an 
escape.  She  was  so  sure  of  her  privilege  of  converse 
with  the  Lord,  that  she  promised,  "  To-morrow  I  will 
tell  you."  She  had  her  vision,  and  we  can  read  it 
in  her  own  words. 

"  I  saw  a  golden  ladder  of  marvellous  height,  reach- 


The  First    Vision  of  Perpetua.  239 

ing  up  even  to  heaven,  and  very  narrow,  so  that 
persons  could  only  ascend  it  one  by  one,  and  on  the 
sides  of  the  ladder  was  fixed  every  kind  of  iron 
weapon.  There  were  there  swords,  lances,  hooks, 
daggers,  so  that  if  any  one  went  up  carelessly,  or  not 
looking  upward,  he  would  be  torn  to  pieces,  and  his 
flesh  would  cleave  to  the  iron  weapons.  And  under 
the  ladder  itself  was  crouching  a  dragon  of  wonder- 
ful size,  who  lay  in  wait  for  those  who  ascended,  and 
frightened  them  from  the  ascent.  And  Saturus  went 
up  first,  who  had  subsequently  delivered  himself  up 
freely  on  our  account,  not  having  been  present  when 
we  were  taken  prisoners.1  And  he  attained  the  top 
of  the  ladder,  and  turned  towards  me,  and  said  to 
me,  'Perpetua,  I  am  waiting  for  you,  but  be  careful 
that  the  dragon  does  not  bite  you.'  And  I  said,  ■  In 
the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  he  shall  not  hurt 
me.'  And  from  under  the  ladder  itself,  as  if  in  fear 
of  me,  he  slowly  lifted  up  his  head,  and  as  I  trod 
upon  the  first  step,  I  trod  upon  his  head.  And  I 
went  up,  and  I  saw  an  immense  extent  of  garden, 
and  in  the  midst  of  the  garden  a  white-haired  man 
sitting,  in  the  dress  of  a  shepherd,  one  of  great 
stature,  milking  sheep,  and  standing  around  were 
many  thousand  white-robed  ones.  And  he  raised  his 
head,  and  looked  upon  me,  and  said,  4  Thou  art  wel- 
come, daughter.'  And  he  called  me,  and  from 
the  cheese,  as  he  was  milking,  he  gave  me  a  little 
cake,  and  I  received  it  with  folded  hands,  and  ate  it, 

1  One  wonders  if  this  Saturus,  giving  himself  up  "on  account 
of"  the  other  prisoners,  was  the  presbyter  who  had  had  them  in 
charge  as  catechumens,  and  was  in  a  sense  responsible  for  their 
fate.     If  so,  one  can  understand  his  self-sacrifice. 


240  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

and  all  who  stood  around  said,  ' Amen'  And  at  the 
sound  of  their  voices  I  was  awakened^still  tasting  a 
sweetness  which  I  cannot  describe.  And  I  immedi- 
ately related  this  to  my  brother,  and  we  understood 
that  it  was  to  be  a  passion,  and  we  ceased  henceforth 
to  have  any  hope  in  this  world." 

It  is  the  beautiful  vision  of  a  woman  of  beautiful 
character,  built  upon  the  familiar  thought  of  our 
Lord  as  the  Good  Shepherd,  combined  with  such 
Scripture  passages  as  Gen.  iii.  15,  Dan.  vii.  9,  10, 
Rev.  i.  14,  and  upon  her  tender  recollections  of  her 
first  communion,  just  made,  with  Ps.  xxxiv.  8  for 
its  echoing  refrain.  Her  Montanist  companions  and 
the  dear  soul  herself  must  have  regarded  it  as  quite 
on  a  level  with  Holy  Scripture.  The  soberer  thought 
of  the  Church  called  such  a  vision  a  gift  of  God  to 
the  receiver,  but  not  a  revelation  binding  upon  the 
Church  at  large.  So  the  great  St.  Augustine  ex- 
pressl}7  cautioned  his  hearers,  when  speaking  of  Per- 
petua's  next  vision,  which  we  must  now  relate. 

The  little  company  were  praying  together,  when 
suddenly  a  name  occurred  to  Perpetua  without  any 
apparent  cause,  the  name  of  her  little  brother  Dino- 
crates,  who  died  of  a  cancer  in  the  face, when  he  was 
seven  years  old.  She  reproached  herself  that  she 
had  not  thought  of  him  before,  she  began  to  make 
intense  supplication  for  this  child  of  a  heathen 
house,  who  had  died  unbaptized,  unsaved,  and  that 
night  she  had  a  vision  concerning  him.  "I  saw 
Dinocrates  going  out  from  a  gloomy  place,  where 
also  there  were  several  others," — this  is  evidently  a 
repetition  of  Perpetua's  own  dark  dungeon,—4'  and 


Perpetuus    Vision  of  the   Unsaved  Soul.      241 

lie  was  parched  and  very  thirsty,  with  a  filthy  coun- 
tenance and  pallid  color,  and  the  wound  on  his  face 
which  he  had  when  he  died.  .  .  .  And  between 
him  and  me  there  was  a  large  interval,  so  that 
neither  of  us  could  approach  to  the  other.  And 
moreover,  in  the  same  place  where  Dinocrates  was, 
there  was  a  pool  full  of  water,  having  its  brink 
higher  than  the  stature  of  the  boy,  and  Dinocrates 
raised  himself  up  as  if  to  drink.  And  I  was  grieved 
that  although  that  pool  held  water,  still  on  account 
of  the  height  to  its  brink,  he  could  not  drink.  And 
I  was  aroused,  and  knew  that  my  brother  was  in  suf- 
fering." Perpetua  adds  that  she  prayed  daily  for  this 
brother,  sure  that  her  prayer  would  avail  to  win  his 
release  from  pain,  and  after  they  had  been  removed 
to  another  prison,  near  to  the  amphitheatre  where 
they  were  to  die,  she  had  a  vision  of  comfort.  "  I 
saw  that  that  place  which  I  had  formerly  observed 
to  be  in  gloom  was  now  bright,  and  Dinocrates, 
with  body  clean,  was  finding  refreshment.  And  I 
saw  a  scar  where  there  had  been  a  wound,  and  that 
pool  which  I  had  seen  before,  with  its  margin  low- 
ered even  to  the  boy's  waist.  And  one  drew  water 
from  the  pool  incessantly,  and  upon  its  brink  was  a 
goblet  filled  with  water,  and  Dinocrates  drew  near 
and  began  to  drink  from  it,  and  the  goblet  did  not 
fail.  And  when  he  was  satisfied,  he  went  away 
from  the  water  to  play  joyously,  after  the  manner  of 
children,  and  T  awoke.  Then  I  understood  that  he 
was  translated  from  the  place  of  punishment." 

The   great  master  Augustine  is  cautious,  as  has 
been    said,  and  warns  us  that  this  is  not  Canonical 
P 


242  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Scripture.  Modern  Roman  writers  appeal  to  it  as  a 
revelation  from  God,  teaching  their  doctrine  of  Pur- 
gatory. It  is  to  be  noted,  first,  that  there  is  no 
reason  for  thinking  that  these  pious  dreams  contain 
any  revelation  whatever.  Second,  it  is,  a  question 
how  far  the  ideas  of  this  good  woman  who  had  not 
completed  her  course  of  instruction  preparatory  to 
baptism  when  she  was  arrested,  were  such  as  the 
theological  teachers  of  the  Church  put  forth  to  their 
more  advanced  students.  Perhaps  she  had  had  no 
Christian  teaching  at  all  about  the  condition  of  the 
heathen  dead.  She  had  learned  to  set  a  great  value  on 
the  baptismal  washing,  and  she  had  not  been  told  that 
it  was  wrong  to  go  on  praying  for  people  after  they 
died.  One  cannot  be  sure  of  much  more  as  re- 
gards what  the  Church  had  taught  her.  Third,  in 
any  case  the  modern  doctrine  of  Purgatory  is  a  doc- 
trine concerning  saved  souls  exclusively.  This  vi- 
sion, whether  its  value  is  greater  or  smaller,  con- 
cerns the  case  of  an  unsaved  heathen  soul  exclu- 
sively. 

We  must  pass  over  Perpetua's  last  vision,  and 
give  one  that  was  seen  and  told  by  Saturus.  "  We 
had  suffered,"  he  says,  "  and  were  gone  forth  from 
the  flesh,  and  we  were  beginning  to  be  carried  by 
four  angels  into  the  east,  and  their  hands  touched 
us  not.  And  we  floated,  not  supine  and  looking  up- 
wards, but  as  if  we  were  walking  up  a  gentle  slope. 
And  being  set  free,  we  at  length  saw  the  first  bound- 
less light ;  and  I  said,  '  Perpetua,' — for  she  was  at 
my  side, — '  this  is  what  the  Lord  promised  to  us, 
we  have  received  the  promise.'     And  while  we  are 


Saturnisms    Vision  of  Paradise.  243 

carried  by  those  same  four  angels,  there  appears  to 
us  a  vast  space  resembling  a  pleasure-garden,  having 
rose-trees  and  every  kind  of  flower.  And  the  height 
of  the  trees  was  after  the  measure  of  a  cypress, 
and  the  petals  were  showering  down  incessantly. 
Moreover,  there  in  the  pleasure-ground  four  other 
angels  appeared,  brighter  than  the  former  ones,  who 
when  they  saw  us,  gave  us  honor,  and  said  to  the 
rest  of  the  angels,  4  Here  they  are  !  Here  they  are  ! ' 
with  admiration.  And  those  four  angels  who  bore 
us,  being  greatly  afraid,  put  us  down,  and  we  passed 
over  on  foot  the  space  of  a  furlong  in  a  broad  path. 
There  we  found  Jocundus  and  Saturninus  and  Artax- 
ius,  who  having  suffered  in  the  same  persecution 
were  burned  alive,  and  Quintus,  who,  himself  also  a 
martyr,  had  departed  in  prison.  And  we  asked  of 
them  where  the  rest  were  ;  and  the  angels  said  to 
us,  '  Come  first,  and  greet  your  Lord.' 

"  And  we  came  near  to  a  place  the  walls  of  which 
were  such  as  if  they  were  built  of  light ;  and  before 
the  gate  of  that  place  stood  four  angels,  who  clothed 
those  who  entered  with  white  robes.  And  being 
clothed,  we  entered,  and  saw  the  boundless  light,  and 
heard  the  united  voice  of  some  who  said,  '  Holy ! 
Holy  !  Holy  ! ?  And  in  the  midst  of  that  place  we 
saw  as  it  were  a  hoary  man  sitting,  having  snow- 
white  hair  and  with  a  youthful  countenance,  and  his 
feet  we  saw  not.  And  on  his  right  hand  and  on  his 
left  were  four  and  twenty  elders,  and  behind  them  a 
great  many  others  were  standing.  We  entered  with 
great  wonder,  and  stood  before  the  throne,  and  the 
four  angels  raised  us  up,  and  we  kissed  him,  and  he 


244  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

passed  his  hand  over  our  faces.  And  the  rest  of  the 
elders  said  to  us,  '  Let  us  stand,'  and  we  stood,  and 
made  peace.1  And  the  elders  said  to  us,  4  Go  and 
enjoy!'  And  I  said  to  Perpetua,  'You  have  what 
you  wish.'  And  she  said  to  me,  i  Thanks  be  to  God, 
that  joyous  as  I  was  in  the  flesh,  I  am  now  more 
joyous  here ! ' 

"And  we  went  forth,  and  we  saw  before  the  en- 
trance Optatus,  the  bishop,  at  the  right  hand,  and 
Aspasius,  the  teaching  presbyter,  on  the  left  hand, 
separate  and  sad.  And  they  cast  themselves  at  our 
feet,  and  said,  i  Restore  peace  between  us,  because 
you  have  gone  forth  and  left  us  thus.'  And  we  said 
to  them  '  Art  not  thou  our  father?2  and  thou  our 
presbyter?  that  you  should  cast  yourselves  at  our 
feet ! '  And  we  prostrated  ourselves,  and  we  em- 
braced them,  and  Perpetua  began  to  talk  with  them, 
and  we  drew  them  apart  under  a  rose-tree  in  the 
pleasure -garden.  And  while  we  were  talking  with 
them,  the  angels  said  unto  them,  '  Let  them  alone, 
that  they  may  refresh  themselves,  and  if  you  have 
any  dissensions  between  you,  forgive  another.'  And 
they  drove  them  away.  And  they  said  to  Optatus, 
'  Rebuke  thy  people,  because  they  assemble  to  you  as 
if  returning  from  the  Circus  and  contending  about 
factious  matters.'  And  then  it  seemed  to  us  as  if 
they  would  shut  the  doors.     And  in  that  place  we 


1  This  seems  to  have  been  the  phrase  used  for  giving  arid  re- 
ceiving the  Kiss  of  Peace  in  the  Eucharist.  It  was  not  merely 
that  the  kiss  had -come  to  be  called  "  the  peace,"  but  that  this 
ceremony  was  solemnly  accounted  of  as  a  real  renewal  of  the 
peace  of  God  among  men. 

2 Papa,  "pope,"  is  the  word  used  by  Saturus. 


Montanists  not  yet  Separated  from  the  Church.  245 

began  to  recognize  many  brethren,  and  moreover 
martyrs.  We  were  all  nourished  with  an  indescrib- 
able odor  which  satisfied  us.  Then  I  joyously 
awoke." 

The  vision  tells  us  more  about  Carthage  than 
about  heaven.  Naturally,  for  the  devout  dreamer 
knew  more  about  Carthage  himself.  Even  the  pleas- 
ure-garden and  the  hall  opening  out  of  it,  with  a 
throne  at  the  upper  end,  is  a  recollection  probably 
of  some  rich  man's  horti,  in  the  rich  residence-sec- 
tion, with  a  basilica  given  up  to  Christian  Service. 
And  here  in  this  Carthage  the  bishop  and  a  certain 
presbyter  feel  sadly  that  the  peace  of  God  is  broken 
by  the  clash  of  their  discordant  views.  The  dreamer 
hears  no  condemnation  whatever  passed  upon  the 
presbyter.  He,  then,  we  may  be  sure,  was  of  this 
same  party,  the  party  of  the  new  prophesyings. 
And  yet  the  rebuke  to  the  bishop  is  very  gentle. 
His  chief  fault,  in  a  Montanist  view,  is  that  he  has 
not  rebuked  and  silenced  that  party  in  the  Cartha- 
ginian Church  that  were  noisy  and  rude  in  condem- 
nation of  the  prophesyings.  The  two  parties  have  not 
yet  separated  into  two  Churches,  each  condemning 
the  other  as  no  Church  at  all.  They  still  labor  for 
peace.  We  shall  see  later  how  impossible  it  was  that 
such  peace  should  last. 

These  were  noble  souls,  and  even  if  their  delusion 
had  led  them  into  schism,  it  could  not  have  separated 
them  from  the  love  of  God.  The  day  of  execution 
was  the  Caesar's  birthday, — the  anniversar}r,  that  is, 
of  the  proclamation  of  the  Emperor's  son  and  heir  as 
an  associate  in  the  imperial  government.     On  that 


246  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

day  Perpetua  and  her  companions  were  to  be  con- 
firmed forever  in  their  glorious  estate,  as  joint- 
heirs  of  their  Father's  Kingdom.  The  slave -woman 
Felicitas  had  lately  given  birth  to  a  child  in  the 
prison.  She  had  been  eager  to  suffer  with  fellow 
Christians  rather  than  with  criminals,  and  Roman 
law  would  not  allow  her  execution  to  take  place  be- 
fore her  confinement.  Her  friends  joined  their  prayers 
with  hers,  and  her  labor-pains  came  on  a  month  before 
the  expected  time.  As  she  cried  out  in  her  anguish, 
a  jailer  asked  her  what  she  would  do  in  the  more  bit- 
ter agonies  of  the  arena.  "  What  I  suffer  now,"  she 
said,  "I  suffer  myself.  But  then  there  will  be 
Another  in  me,  who  will  suffer  for  me,  because  I  also 
am  about  to  suffer  for  Him."  The  day  came,  and  the 
prisoners  entered  the  arena,  Perpetua  singing  psalms, 
"  already  treading  on  the  head  of  the  Egyptian ;  Re- 
vocatus  and  Saturninus  and  Saturns  uttered  threats 
against  the  gazing  people  about  this  martyrdom." 
The  populace,  indignant,  demanded  that  as  the  mar- 
tyrs passed  along  a  line  of  guards,  they  should  be 
scourged,  a  sort  of  "  running  the  gauntlet."  The  vic- 
tims only  rejoiced  that  another  element  of  likeness  to 
the  sufferings  of  Jesus  Christ  was  added  to  their  glory. 
It  was  noted  that  prayers  were  strangely  answered. 
Saturninus  had  asked  that  he  might  be  thrown  to  all 
the  beasts.  He  had  trial  of  a  leopard  and  a  bear. 
Saturus  had  had  a  sinking  terror  of  wild  beasts,  and 
lo !  a  boar  brought  out  against  him  turned  and  slew 
the  huntsman  that  had  him  in  charge,  and  a  bear  be- 
fore which  Saturus  was  next  exposed  refused  to  leave 
his  den.      The  women  had  prayed  for  nothing  but 


Martyrs  Triumph  over  Pain  and  Fear.         247 

steadfastness.     They  were  bound  in  nets  and  exposed 
to  a  wild  cow,  as  in  mockery  of  their  sex. 

Perpetua  suffered  first,  and  after  she  was  tossed, 
the  audience  saw  her  gathering  her  robe  around  her, 
"  more  mindful  of  her  modesty  than  of  her  suffering." 
Brought  forward  again,  she  was  careful  to  bind  her 
dishevelled  hair,  because  the  hair  unbound  was  a 
sign  of  mourning,  and  a  martyr  for  Jesus  Christ 
must  not  even  seem  to  mourn.  Then  when  she  saw 
Felicitas  lying  crushed  upon  the  sand,  she  went  to 
her  and  lifted  her  up,  and  presently,  when  both  had 
been  dismissed,  she  seemed  to  wake  as  from  an  "  ec- 
stasy," and  said,  iC  I  cannot  tell  when  we  are  to  be 
led  out  to  that  cow."  She  knew  nothing  of  what 
had  passed.  A  little  later,  and  Saturus,  whose  cour- 
age rose  with  his  peril,  went  calmly  to  meet  a  leop- 
ard, and  returned  as  calmly,  bathed  in  his  own  blood. 
11  Safe  washed  !  Safe  washed !  "  1  screamed  the  popu- 
lace, who  had  picked  up  some  crude  notions  about 
the  Christian  belief  in  baptism  as  a  regeneration. 
But  Saturus  said  simply  to  the  soldier  Pudens,  who 
had  been  one  of  the  prison -guards  and  was  already 
half  a  convert,  "  Farewell,  and  be  mindful  of  my  faith, 
and  let  not  these  things  disturb,  but  confirm  thee  !  " 
Then  the  great  audience,  satiated  with  tortures,  de- 

1  "  Salvum  lotum!"  was  the  cry.  The  Latin  word  salmis  was 
used  by  the  early  Christians  with  a  meaning  not  to  be  con- 
veyed in  any  one  English  word.  "Saved"  means  more  to  our 
ears  than  salvus  to  theirs.  "In  a  state  of  salvation  "  expresses  it 
well,  as  if  a  person  was  in  an  ark  of  safety,  where  in  one  sense  he 
was  absolutely  secure  from  harm,  and  yet  he  might  drop  out  of  it 
and  be  drowned.  Contrariwise,  to  say  that  a  man  is  not  salvus  in 
this  world  is  not  to  deny  that  he  may  be  saved  in  the  world  to 
come.  A  man  cannot  be  salvus  outside  of  the  Church  of  God,  but 
he  may  be  on  the  way  to  salvation. 


248  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

— . « . . 

manded  death.  The  Christians  were  to  be  dragged 
into  the  middle  of  the  arena,  and  despatched.  It 
was  a  last  opportunity  to  do  honor  to  their  King, 
and  now  with  one  accord  these  victims  stretched 
upon  the  sand,  all  faint  with  pain  and  loss  of  blood, 
rose  up  to  go  unforced  to  the  place  of  their  deliver- 
ance into  life.  But  first  they  gave  one  another  the 
kiss  of  peace  as  if  they  were  about  to  offer  their 
Eucharistic  Sacrifice, — no  doubt,  that  was  just  what 
they  felt  that  they  were  going  to  do  shortly  enough, 
worshipping  with  angels  and  archangels  from  their 
place  beneath  heaven's  golden  altar, — and  then  they 
walked  in  solemn  stillness  to  the  place  of  death. 
Silent  and  unmoved,  they  all  received  the  sword- 
thrust,  the  once  fearful  Saturus  going  to  glory  first, 
as  in  Perpetua's  dream.  Only  Perpetua  herself,  hurt 
by  a  stroke  from  an  unsteady  hand,  cried  out  and 
guided  the  sword  of  the  executioner  to  her  throat. 

"  Oh!  most  brave  and  blessed  martyrs! "  says  the 
story.  "  Oh !  truly  called  and  chosen  unto  the  glory 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ !  Whosoever  magnifies 
and  honors  and  adores  Him,  ought  assuredly  to  read 
these  examples  for  the  edification  of  the  Church,  not 
less  than  those  of  old,  so  that  new  virtues  also  may 
testify  that  one  and  the  same  Holy  Spirit  is  always 
operating  even  until  now,  and  God  the  Father  Omni- 
potent, and  His  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  whose  is  the 
glory  and  infinite  power  for  ever  and  ever.  Amen." 
After  such  an  outburst  cold  criticism  is  an  anti- 
climax, but  for  the  truth's  sake  we  must  note  the 
moral  of  this  story.  A  movement  may  produce 
noble  fruits  of  holy  lives,  may  be  greatly  blessed  by 


A  Wise  Bishop  May  Be  More  than  a  Constant  Martyr .249 

Almighty  God,  even  with  gladdening  vision  and  in- 
spiring prophecy  and  glorious  martyrdom,  and  yet 
be  an  unwise  movement,  an  unhealthy  movement,  a 
movement  which  the  Church  is  bound  to  condemn. 
That  troubled  bishop,  Optatus,  refusing  to  recognize 
such  visions  as  Perpetua's  as  revelations  binding  on 
the  conscience  of  the  Church,  was  perhaps  a  better 
servant  of  the  Church,  and  of  the  Lord  the  Great 
Head  of  the  Church,  there  in  his  everyday  anxieties, 
his  separation,  his  sadness,  and  his  faithfulness,  than 
even  the  beloved  Perpetua  in  her  martyrdom.1 

III.  Monarehianism.  It  has  been  said  in  our  first 
chapter  that  the  struggle  with  heresy,  claiming  to  be 
the  Catholic  Religion  when  it  was  not,  belongs  to  the 
period  following  Constantine's  conversion,  the  period 
of  Christianity  come  into  fashion.  It  was  not  meant 
that  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  saw  no  difficulties  at  all 
of  that  kind,  but  that  they  were  not  its  characteris- 
tic trials.  False  explanations  of  the  Faith  got  no 
such  attention  from  men  who  really  meant  to  be 
Christians  in  this  age  as  in  the  next  one,  and  there- 
fore gave  the  Church  no  such  distress.  But  cer- 
tainly the  movement  known  under  various  names  as 
Monarehianism,  Patripassianism,  Sabellianism,  was 
one  of  those  in  which  men  make  an  assault  upon  the 
Catholic  Faith,  while  it  is  their  honest  purpose  to  ex- 
plain it.  And  here  let  it  be  said  that  new  explana- 
tions of  ancient  forms  of  words  are  in  themselves 

1  Perpetua  and  her  companions  are  still  commemorated  in  the 
Calendar  of  the  Church  of  England  on  March  7.  The  story  of 
these  martyrs  is  given  in  Ante-Nicene  Fathers  (American  Edition 
Christian  Literature  Co.)  Vol.  III.,  699-706.  In  the  Edinburgh 
Edition,  T.  and  T.  Clark,  the  reference  is  Yol.  XIII.,  276. 


250  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

perfectly  admissible.  They  may  help  a  new  gener- 
atioQ  to  grasp  an  old  idea.  But  when  a  new  expla- 
nation of  an  old  Creed  is  found  really  to  deny  the 
ancient  historical  meaning  which  is  the  very  faith 
that  that  Creed  was  made  to  enshrine,  charity  should 
acknowledge  with  tender  sympathy  the  honesty  of 
the  endeavor  to  explain,  but  faith  should  be  clear- 
headed enough  to  brand  the  explanation  as  heresy, 
and  so  give  warning  to  the  unlearned  that  that  way 
out  of  difficulties  is  closed. 

It  has  been  noted  that  this  inevitable  conflict  of 
the  faith  with  honest,  but  poisonous  heresy,  has 
followed  the  order  of  the  Catholic  Creeds  from  the 
first  paragraph  to  the  last.  Gnosticism  set  up  its 
rival  religion  with  a  difference  in  the  very  first 
words  of  its  Credo.  Granting  that  it  might  say, 
"I  believe  in  one  God," — though  its  "iEons"and 
its  "  Demiurge "  looked  more  like  the  heathen 
scheme  of  "  gods  many  and  lords  many," — yet  its 
God  was  a  different  kind  of  God,  a  Being  of  an- 
other character,  from  the  God  of  the  Apostolic 
Faith.  Gnosticism  stumbled  at  the  idea  of  a  good 
God  who  should  make  an  evil  world,  and  there  must 
be  a  struggle  to  teach  men  to  believe  in  the  Catholic 
Revelation  of  God  Almighty,  in  love  a  Father,  in 
power  a  Creator,  Maker  and  Upholder  of  all  the 
universe,  with  all  its  freedom  and  all  its  mixture  of 
evil  and  good.  Then  in  the  later  period  came  the 
successive  strifes  over  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine 
Nature  of  the  Divine  Son,  then  over  His  Human 
Nature  and  over  the  union  of  the  two.  Our  own 
late  days  are  seeing  the  struggle  to  make  the  Faith 


Meaning  of  Name  Monarchianism.  251 

accepted  as  concerning  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  in  the  upholding  of  the  Mystical  Body,  the 
Church,  in  the  sacramental  Forgiveness  of  Sins, 
and  in  the  Salvation  of  the  Flesh  in  final  Resurrec- 
tion. The  heresy  of  which  we  are  now  to  speak 
takes  its  place  logically  in  the  evolution  of  man's 
long  struggle  with  the  real  difficulties  of  God's  Rev- 
elation. It  is  the  failure  of  those  who,  laboring  to 
defend  the  Divine  Unity  against  Gnosticism,  fell 
into  error  on  the  other  side. 

The  name  Monarchianism  is  derived  from  the 
Greek  words  for  "  a  single  Origin."  The  idea  is 
that  the  Great  First  Cause  of  all  things  must  be  a 
single  cause.  That,  the  holders  of  the  Catholic 
Faith  have  always  maintained.  It  is  the  Father 
alone  who  is  God  inoriginate,  God  in  Himself  alone, 
and  of  Himself  alone.  The  Father  alone  is  a  Source 
of  Godhead.  The  Son  is  God  eternally,  but  not  of 
Himself.  He  is  God  eternally,  because  the  Father 
has  eternally  begotten  Him.  The  Holy  Ghost  is  an 
eternal  Divine  Breathing,  but  not  of  Himself.  He 
is  God  eternally,  because  the  Father  has  eternally 
breathed  such  a  Breath.  There  is  but  one  Arche, 
one  Beginning  and  Well-spring  of  Deity,  who  yet 
has  called  forth  eternally  these  answering  Voices,  so 
that  there  has  never  been  a  time,  or  an  eternity, 
when  they  have  not  responded  to  the  utterance  of 
the  Father's  Love.  That  is  the  Catholic  Doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  saving  at  once  the  necessity  of  a  Sin- 
gle Cause,  and  the  revelation  of  the  Three  Divine 
Persons.  But  there  was  a  time  in  the  last  years  of 
the  second  century  when  man}7  earnest  men  were 


252  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

singularly  jealous  of  the  truth  of  the  Single  First 
Cause,  and  they  could  not  bear  any  doctrine  of  plu- 
rality within  the  Being  of  God.  The  first  revolt  of 
unreasonable  reason  against  God's  own  revelation  of 
Himself  seems  to  have  taken  the  coarse  and  rather 
rough  and  ready  form  of  denying  the  Divinity  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  We  hear  of  a  certain  Theod- 
otus  of  Byzantium,  a  cobbler,  who  advanced  such  a 
view  at  Rome,  acknowledging  the  supernatural  vir- 
gin-birth of  our  Lord,  but  refusing  to  call  Him  God. 
Another  Theodotus,  a  banker,  joined  the  movement, 
and  it  gained  force  enough  to  set  up  a  bishop,  Nata- 
lius,  and  to  pay  him  150  denarii  a  month,  about  five 
times  as  much  as  a  day-laborer  could  earn.  It  is 
said  to  be  "  the  first  example  of  a  salaried  clergy- 
man." Certainly  the  clergy  of  the  Catholic  Church 
were  in  the  habit  of  living  on  the  Church's  money. 
It  may  be,  however,  that  guaranteeing  a  particular 
sum  was  a  new  thing,  or  that  this  was  regarded  as 
immoderate  pay,  tending  to  ensnare  a  man's  con- 
science. At  any  rate,  Natalius  returned  to  the 
Church  after  a  time  a  penitent,  declaring  that  he  had 
had  a  vision  of  angels  who  scourged  him  severely  by 
way  of  penance  for  his  sin.  The  heresy  of  Theod- 
otus seems  to  have  continued  to  find  favor  with 
some  few  exceptional  minds  for  a  century,  but  it 
was  never  a  conspicuous  force. 

A  much  more  mischievous  form  of  false  Monarch- 
ianism  appeared  in  Rome  a  little  later,  taking  an 
almost  exactly  opposite  way  of  meeting  the  Mo- 
narchian  difficulty.  Theodotus  had  tried  to  save  the 
Divine  Unity  by  taking  away  the  Divinity  of  Jesus 


Heretical    View  of  a  Modal  Trinity.  253 

Christ.  This  new  heresy  seemed  at  first  only  to 
exalt  Him.  "  God  is  one,"  it  says,  "  but  He  has 
many  glorious  ways  of  manifesting  Himself,  and 
among  these  many  manifestations  He  has  three 
to  which  He  has  given  special  Names  in  His  desire 
to  fasten  them  upon  the  grateful  memory  of  His 
people.  He  calls  Himself  Father  to  set  forth  all  love 
and  all  authority  as  summed  up  in  Himself.  He 
calls  Himself  Son,  to  show  Himself  obedient  to  His 
own  laws,  not  arbitrary,  either,  but  gentle,  and  ready 
to  take  on  our  very  humanity,  and  constitute  Him- 
self a  Brother  to  the  souls  which  He  has  made.  He 
calls  Himself  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Holy  Breath,  as 
One  who  breathes  on  all  men  with  words  of  truth, 
with  gifts  of  life.  Just  as  one  of  us  may  be  at  once 
a  father  and  a  son  and  a  husband  and  a  brother,  a 
teacher,  an  admonisher,  a  comforter  of  sorrow,  and  a 
bringer  of  mirth,  so  God  is  One  Person,  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  all  in  one,  and  all  at  once,  and  all 
always,  and  in  such  wise  that  Son  and  Holy  Ghost 
are  but  names  for  the  one  God,  our  Father,  acting  in 
particular  ways."  It  was  perhaps  unfortunate  that 
in  both  Greek  and  Latin  the  word  that  the  Church 
found  waiting  for  her  to  use  to  express  the  idea  of 
"Person,"  was  a  word  that  meant  first  "an  actor's 
mask."  On  the  stage  of  those  days  men  were  used 
to  seeing  one  kind  of  mask  worn  to  represent  an 
old  man,  another  for  a  young  man,  another  for  a 
woman,  another  for  a  child.  The  idea  was  easily 
caught  up  that  the  threefold  personality  in  the 
Divine  Being  was  not  the  response  of  love  to  love 
and  of  holy  will  to  holy  will,  but  only  the  putting 


254  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

on  of  various  gracious  aspects  by  one  All-wise  Actor, 
the  better  to  impress  the  troubled  world  that  waited 
for  Almighty  Love  to  show  His  face.  But  this,  the 
Catholic  Church  declared,  was  no  true  Monarchian- 
ism.  It  was  not  the  "  Faith  which  was  once  deliv- 
ered unto  the  saints."  It  did  not  fit  with  the  lan- 
guage of  the  New  Testament  about  the  Father  lov- 
ing the  Son,  and  sending  the  Son,  and  the  Son 
praying  to  the  Father,  and  both  sending  the  Holy 
Ghost.  No !  this  was  rather  Patripassianism  (from 
the  Latin  words,  Patris  jiassio,  "  the  Father's  suffer- 
ing "),  for  in  identifying  the  Father  with  the  Son,  it 
made  it  necessary  to  hold  that  the  Divine  Father 
Himself  was  incarnate  for  our  salvation,  born  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  put  to  death  on  the  Cross,  raised  from 
the  grave.  The  heresy  thus  disowned  came  to  be 
generally  known  by  the  name  of  Patripassianism  in 
the  West.  In  the  East,  it  was  known  from  the 
name  of  a  presbyter,  Sabellius,  who  preached  it 
eagerly,  as  Sabellianism. 

Our  one  great  authority  for  the  early  history  of 
this  movement  is  a  Roman  writer,  Hippolytus,  of 
whom  we  are  to  hear  in  our  next  chapter.  He  says 
that  the  heresy  was  invented  by  Noetus,  a  native  of 
Smyrna.  It  had  its  beginning,  then,  in  that  same 
province  of  Asia,  where  all  the  Church's  chief 
troubles  seem  to  have  been  precipitated  for  many 
years.  One  wonders  whether  St.  John  established 
his  Apostolic  throne  at  Ephesus  because  he  felt  that 
there  centred  a  population  more  impulsive,  restless, 
self-willed,  more  given  to  be  opinionated  without 
study,  and  tenacious  of  rules  without  reason,  than 


Noetus  Introduces  Monarchianism  at  Rome.     255 


any  other  in  the  Church.  At  any  rate  the  field  of 
Quartocleciman  obstinacy  and  Montanist  fanaticism 
had  been  the  hotbed  of  the  wildest  forms  of  Gnostic 
speculation  still  earlier,  and  now  bore  fruit  of  ill-con- 
sidered opposition  to  Gnostic  thought.  How  the 
speculations  of  Noetus  were  received  in  his  own 
country,  we  are  not  told.  They  had  a  following. 
We  know  no  more.  But  "  all  roads  lead  to  Rome." 
The  saying  was  true  in  those  days.  Every  man  who 
had  something  new  to  say  wanted  to  say  it  in  the 
chief  city  of  the  world.  Noetus  went  there  too.  It 
was  reported  of  him  that  he  taught  strange  tilings 
contrary  to  the  faith,  and  the  "council  of  presby- 
ters "  examined  him..  He  denied  that  he  had  taught 
such  things,  and  was  let  go  in  peace.  Later,  having 
gained  some  adherents,  and  being  called  again  before 
the  council,  he  acknowledged  the  truth  of  the  accu- 
sations against  him.  It  seems  hardly  doubtful  that 
the  poor  man  had  defended  himself  by  falsehood,  till 
the  evidence  against  him  was  irresistible.  Being 
then  excommunicated,  he  announced  himself  as  the 
Moses  of  a  new  deliverance  of  God's  people,  and 
called  his  brother  Aaron. 

These  things  must,  apparently,  have  happened  in 
the  episcopate  of  Victor,  a  man  of  severe  fidelity  to 
what  he  believed  to  be  the  interests  of  the  Kingdom 
of  God,  but  narrow,  overbearing,  and  harsh.  Popu- 
lar election  is  apt  to  follow  such  a  man  with  his  op- 
posite. When  Victor  died,  probably  in  198,  the 
choice  of  the  Roman  Church  fell  on  Zephyrinus, 
who  seems  to  have  been  easy-going  and  easily  in- 
fluenced, a  ready  instrument  in  the  hands  of  men  of 


256  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

stronger  character  than  himself.  Meanwhile  Noetus 
and  his  Aaron  passed  away  shortly  after  their  sepa- 
ration from  the  communion  of  the  Church.  Leaders 
who  are  but  names  to  us  succeed  them,  Epigonus, 
Cleomenes.  But  somewhere  in  the  course  of  the 
episcopate  of  Zephyrinus  there  came  from  "  Asia  "  a 
man  of  greater  power,  it  would  seem,  than  Noetus, 
who  appeared  as  a  champion  of  Noetian  thought.  It 
was  Praxeas,  a  man  of  whom  little  is  known,  save 
that  he  had  been  imprisoned  in  a  recent  persecution, 
and  had  now  a  glory  of  confessorship  attaching  to 
his  name.  His  stay  in  Rome  would  seem  to  have 
been  but  brief,  for  lie  is  not  so  much  as  mentioned 
by  Hippolytus,  and  he  passed  on  to  Carthage,  where 
he  was  opposed  by  the  great  teacher  Tertullian, — 
"by  him  whose  agency  God  was  pleased  to  employ," 
is  Tertullian's  phrase,  which  must  be  a  modest  refer- 
ence to  himself, — and  actually  brought  back  to  the 
Catholic  Faith.  Then  he  disappears  from  view. 
But  his  visit  to  Rome  had  had  no  small  results.  He 
had  found  the  bishop  deeply  influenced  by  certain 
Montanist  teachers,  so  that  he  had  actually  admitted 
them  to  communion,  given  them,  as  the  phrase  then 
was,  the  peace  of  the  Church.  Praxeas,  then,  had 
pointed  out  to  Zephyrinus  that  the  decisions  of  his 
predecessors l  had  condemned  these  people  as  schis- 
matics, and  had  further  persuaded  him  that  the  old 

1  The  word  "predecessors"  is  important  as  showing  that  the 
bishop  under  whom  this  happened  was  the  pliable  Zepbyrinus, 
and  not  the  inflexible  Victor,  or  (more  improbably  still)  Eleu- 
therus.  Montanism  cannot  have  been  known  at  Rome,  so  as  to 
be  condemned  before  the  time  of  Eleutherus  a  tall,  and  ' k  predeces- 
sors must  be  Eleutherus  and  Victor." 


Roman  Authorities  Led  Astray  by  Praxeas.  257 

decisions  were  just.  Praxeas  had  just  come  from 
"Asia,"  and  could  tell  a  vivid  story,  doubtless,  of 
what  Montanism  was  like  in  its  native  wildness. 
But  he  accomplished  more  than  this.  He  persuaded 
the  Roman  bishop,  if  not  actually  to  adopt  his  views 
about  a  "  modal  Trinity,"  as  it  is  sometimes  called, 
at  least  to  admit  some  of  those  who  held  it  to  his 
fellowship.  Nothing  less  than  that  can  possibly  be 
meant  by  Tertullian's  bitter  epigram, — "  Praxeas  ac- 
complished two  great  achievements  at  Rome.  He 
banished  the  Spirit,  and  crucified  the  Father."  Hip- 
polytus,  as  we  shall  see,  charges  both  Zephyrinus 
and  his  successor,  Callistus,  with  favoring  this  form 
of  heresy,  and  declares  that  Sabellius,  by  whose 
name  it  is  now  generally  known,  was  led  astray  in 
this  matter  by  Callistus  himself.  We  need  not  be- 
lieve all  these  accusations ;  but  the  fact  remains, 
after  all  possible  allowances  have  been  made,  that 
this  heresy  found  the  great  Roman  Church  weaker 
to  resist  it,  than  any  other  leading  Church  in  Chris- 
tendom, and  that  Rome's  greatest  theologian  believed 
a  bishop  of  Rome  to  be  a  heretic  himself.  Of  this 
we  shall  hear  more,  when  we  come  to  the  story  of 
Hippolytus. 
Q 


CHAPTER  IX. 

EARLY   THEOLOGIANS    OF   THE   WEST:    IREN^EUS ; 
TERTULLIAN  ;  HIPPOLYTUS. 

OVEMENTS  are  made,  or  met,  by  men. 
It  is  time  now  to  fix  our  attention  on  cer- 
tain great  leaders  of  thought  whom  God's 
providence  raised  up  about  the  end  of 
the  second  century,  to  influence  the 
Church  profoundly  in  the  East  and  in  the  West. 
We  may  begin  with  the  Western  Church,  and  it  will 
furnish  us  with  three  subjects  :  Irenseus,  the  Con- 
servative, with  his  book  Against  All  Heresies  ;  Ter- 
tullian,  the  Radical,  who  defended  the  Catholic 
Church  as  an  infallible  Teacher,  and  died  the  founder 
of  a  sect ;  and  Hippolytus,  the  Puritan,  who  bears 
the  honors  of  a  martyr-saint,  but  is  famous  for  a 
deadly  quarrel  with  two  holders  of  the  Roman  See. 

I.  Irenceus.  The  conservatives  make  the  least 
noise  in  the  world,  and  of  Irenaeus  little  is 
known.  A  native,  apparently  of  the  province 
of  Asia,  and  born  not  far  from  A.  D.  130,  he 
was  a  pupil  of  St.  Polycarp,  the  martyr-bishop  of 
Smyrna.  There  is  an  uncertain  tradition  that  he 
had  removed  to  Rome  and  was  teaching  there  at  the 
time  of  St.  Poly  carp's  death.  We  know  that  when 
the  Churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  suffered  persecu- 
tion in  177,  Irenaeus  was  a  presbyter  of  the  Church 

258 


IrenseuSy  the   Conservative  and  Peace-Maker.  259 

of  Lyons,  and  was  in  Rome  as  its  messenger  on  some 
errand  to  the  Bishop  Eleutherus.  The  persecution 
over,  he  succeeded  Pothinus  as  bishop  of  Lyons,  and 
the  end  of  his  life  must  have  been  nearly  coincident 
with  that  of  the  century.  A  pupil  of  a  pupil  of  St. 
John  the  Evangelist,  he  is  a  very  weighty  authority 
as  to  what  Apostolic  Christianity  really  was.  As 
one  who  knew  intimately  the  Churches  of  three 
centres  so  widely  separated  as  Asia  Minor,  Rome, 
and  Southern  Gaul,  he  had  a  particular  good  oppor- 
tunity to  know  whether  the  Church  of  his  own  day 
was  holding  fast  the  tradition  of  Apostolic  teaching. 
To  him  no  other  subject  could  be  more  interesting. 
Other  men  might  be  moved  to  re-write  Christian 
theology,  so  as  to  show  how  it  could  be  harmonized 
with  the  noblest  utterances  of  Greek  philosophy,  the 
one  answering  to  the  other  because  in  both  were 
movings  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  To  Irenseus  the  one 
great  concern  was,  "Hold  that  fast  which  thou 
hast."  A  man  "  composed  unto  union,"  like  Igna- 
tius of  Antioch,  he  seems  to  have  been  a  gentle  soul, 
as  gentle  as  Ignatius  was  fiery.  His  name  of  Ire- 
nceus — Makepeace  in  its  English  equivalent — is  so 
well  deserved  that  one  wonders  whether  it  could 
really  have  been  given  him  before  his  character  was 
formed,  or  whether  again  it  was  bestowed  upon  him 
b}'  a  Christian  mother,  who  succeeded  in  training  up 
her  boy  to  be  what  she  had  wished  and  prayed  that 
he  might  be.  We  have  already  seen  him  using  his 
influence  at  Rome  to  make  peace  between  high- 
handed Bishop  Victor  and  the  Quartodecimans  of 
Asia,  and  again  to  keep  a  just  peace,  when  Montanist 


260  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

leaders  were  trying  to  get  foreign  Churches  to  in- 
terfere in  their  behalf  in  the  same  province.  One 
more  feature  we  must  add  to  our  picture  of  the  man, 
— a  tinge  of  melancholy  brightened  by  an  ardent 
hope.  From  a  lost  book  of  his  one  saying  has  floated 
down  to  us, — The  whole  occupation  of  the  Christian  is 
to  practise  dying.  Perhaps  he  meant  that  the  Chris- 
tian of  that  day  must  practise  a  daily  giving  up  of 
things  that  all  his  neighbors  were  keenly  interested 
in.  Perhaps  he  meant  that  the  Christian  must  carry 
his  life  in  his  hand,  daily  renewing  the  spirit  of  per- 
fect readiness  to  be  a  martyr,  if  the  Lord  should  so 
call.  It  may  be  again  that  he  actually  meant  to 
speak  of  the  Christian's  Eucharists  and  prayers  as 
a  daily  entering  into  the  life  of  Paradise  and  the  fel- 
lowship of  God,  only  to  be  plucked  back  again  to  re- 
new the  struggle  of  this  world.  In  an}'  case  the 
saying  marks  the  man  of  an  "other-worldly"  mind, 
the  man  whose  hope  is  in  a  new  world  that  is  to  be, 
rather  than  in  any  great  bettering  of  this.  He  was 
distinctly  one  of  those  men  of  vision — "  visionaries  " 
we  have  no  right  to  call  them — who  in  almost  every 
age  are  found  fixing  their  thoughts  upon  the  Second 
Coming  of  our  Lord  as  the  world's  chief  hope,  and 
looking  for  it  so  constantly  and  eagerly  that  it  in- 
evitably seems  near  to  them,  though  it  be  still  far 
off. 

Ire  use  us  never  wrote  many  books.  He  excuses 
himself  as  one  who  lived  among  Celts  and  spoke 
their  barbarous  language  habitually,  and  could  not 
be  expected  to  write  Greek  elegantly  or  easily. 
Very  likely  he  was  a  Galatian  by  birth  and  had  a 


The  Booh  Against  All  Heresies.  261 

Celtic  dialect  for  his  mother  tongue.  He  wrote,  not 
as  a  ready  writer,  but  by  constraint,  when  it  seemed 
to  be  a  duty  laid  upon  him.  In  that  spirit  he  under- 
took the  only  work  of  his  which  has  come  down  to 
us,  his  five  books  Against  All  Heresies,  or  to  use  his 
own  title,  The  Refutation  and  Overthrow  of  Science 
Falsely  So  Called.  It  would  be  useless  to  try  to  an- 
alyze its  250  crowded  pages,  which  would  make 
1,000  like  these.  Enough  to  say  that  the  first  book 
is  taken  up  with  an  account  of  the  prevailing  he- 
retical systems  of  a  Gnostic  type,  especially  that  of 
Valentinus,  with  a  sketch  of  the  history  of  heretical 
movements  from  the  time  of  Simon  Magus  in  the 
middle  of  the  first  century,  the  second  book  argues 
against  the  Gnostic  ideas  mainly  on  the  ground  of 
inherent  unreasonableness,  and  the  remaining  three 
books  are  filled  with  an  argument  from  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. In  these  last  the  fourth  book  is  rather  partic- 
ularly occupied  with  the  defence  and  explanation  of 
the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  as  making  one 
scheme  with  the  Christian  Gospel,  and  the  fifth  with 
the  defence  of  the  truth  of  the  Incarnation.  Noth- 
ing more  offensive  to  the  Gnostic,  nothing  dearer  to 
Irenaeus,  than  the  idea  of  the  Word  made  flesh.  As 
specially  notable  points  of  the  theology  of  Irenreus, 
we  ma}^  consider  his  doctrine  of  the  ground  of  cer- 
tainty in  religion,  his  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation 
and  of  the  Sacraments,  and  his  doctrine  of  the  "  last 
things." 

1.  As  regards  the  ground  of  certainty,  certainly 
no  believer  has  ever  been  more  certain  of  his  ground. 
Irenseus  held  with  utter  confidence  that  some  cen- 


262  The  Post-Apostolic  Aye. 

tral  truths  had  been  given  to  the  Church  to  remem- 
ber, and  that  the  Church  had  infallibly  remembered 
them.  It  was  not  a  matter  of  infallible  judgment  in 
meeting  new  questions  as  they  came  up,  nor  yet  of 
an  infallible  interpretation  of  Scripture,  nor  of  any 
infallible  evolution  in  the  Church's  mind.  It  was 
simply  a  matter  of  memory.  Jesus  Christ  had  com- 
mitted a  certain  body  of  truths  to  the  company  of 
the  Apostles,  to  be  held  fast  to  the  end  of  time. 
Their  successors,  the  bishops  of  the  Churches 
throughout  the  world,  held  everywhere  this  same 
body  of  certain  truth.  Let  IrensBUs  speak  for  him- 
self, telling  us  just  what  he  understood  these  essen- 
tials of  the  Gospel  to  be,  and  how  he  felt  about  the 
certainty  of  them. 

"  The  Church,  though  dispersed  throughout  the 
whole  world,  even  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  has  re- 
ceived from  the  Apostles  and  their  disciples  this 
faith  :  In  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of 
heaven  and  earth  and  the  sea  and  all  things  that  are 
in  them  ;  and  in  one  Christ  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God, 
who  became  incarnate  for  our  salvation  ;  and  in  the 
Holy  Spirit,  who  proclaimed  through  the  prophets 
the  dispensations  of  God,  and  the  advents,  and  the 
birth  from  a  virgin,  and  the  passion,  and  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead,  and  the  ascension  into  heaven 
in  the  flesh  of  the  beloved  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord, 
and  His  manifestation  from  heaven  in  the  glory  of 
the  Father  to  gather  all  things  into  one,  and  to  raise 
up  anew  all  flesh  of  the  whole  human  race,  in  order 
that  to  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord,  and  God,  and  Saviour, 
and    King,   according   to    the   will   of  the  invisible 


Honorable  Meaning  of  Tradition  in  Irenseus.    263 

Father,  every  knee  should  boiv  of  things  in  heaven^  and 
things  on  earth,  and  things  under  the  earth,  and  that 
every  tongue  should  confess  to  Him,  that  He  should 
execute  just  judgment  towards  all  ;  that  He  may  send 
spiritual  iciclcednesses,  and  the  angels  who  transgressed 
and  became  apostate,  together  with  the  ungodly,  and 
unrighteous,  and  wicked,  and  profane,  among  men, 
into  everlasting  fire;  but  may  in  the  exercise  of  His 
grace  confer  immortality  upon  the  righteous  and 
holy  and  those  who  have  kept  His  commandments 
and  persevered  in  His  love,  some  from  the  beginning, 
and  others  from  their  repentance,  and  may  surround 
them  with  everlasting  glory. 

"As  I  have  already  observed,  the  Church  having 
received  this  preaching  and  this  faith,  although  scat- 
tered throughout  the  whole  world,  yet  as  if  occupy- 
ing but  one  house,  carefully  preserves  it.  She  also 
believes  these  points  just  as  if  she  had  but  one  soul, 
and  one  and  the  same  heart,  and  she  proclaims  them 
and  teaches  them  and  hands  them  down  as  if  she 
possessed  only  one  mouth.  For  though  the  languages 
of  the  world  are  dissimilar,  yet  the  import  of  the 
tradition  is  one  and  the  same.  For  the  Churches 
which  have  been  planted  in  Germany  do  not  believe 
or  hand  down  anything  different,  nor  do  those  in 
Spain,  nor  those  in  Gaul,  nor  those  in  the  East,  nor 
those  in  Libya,  nor  those  which  have  been  estab- 
lished in  the  central  regions  of  the  world." 

We  may  well  observe  the  honorable  meaning  of 
"  tradition  "  in  Jrenpeus.  It  is  the  solemn  and  safe 
handing  on  of  the  few  things  which  all  Christians 
know  for  certain.     Later  the  same  word  was  used  to 


264  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

cover  an  attempt  to  bind  on  men's  consciences  a 
good  many  things  which  some  Christians  had  simply 
guessed.  These  so  different  uses  of  the  word  should 
not  be  confounded.  The  passage  just  quoted  is  from 
Book  I.  x.  1,  2.  It  is  only  one  of  many  which  indi- 
cate that  Irenasus  regarded  "  the  faith  "  as  one  and 
certain.  How  he  would  make  the  oneness  establish 
the  certainty  may  be  seen  in  Book  III.  iii.  1,  2. 

11  It  is  within  the  power  of  all  in  every  Church  who 
may  wish  to  see  the  truth,  to  contemplate  clearly  the 
tradition  of  the  Apostles  manifested  throughout  the 
whole  world  ;  and  we  are  in  a  position  to  reckon  up 
those  who  were  by  the  Apostles  instituted  bishops  of 
the  Churches,  and  the  succession  of  these  men  to  our 
own  times, — those  who  neither  taught  nor  knew  of 
anything  like  what  these  rave  about.  For  if  the 
Apostles  had  known  hidden  mysteries,  which  they 
were  in  the  habit  of  imparting  to  them  that  are  per- 
fect, apart  and  privily  from  the  rest,  they  would  have 
delivered  them  especially  to  those  to  whom  they 
were  also  committing  the  Churches  themselves. 
For  they  were  desirous  that  these  men  should  be 
very  perfect  and  blameless  in  all  things  whom  also 
they  were  leaving  behind  as  successors,  delivering  up 
their  own  place  of  government  to  these  men,  which 
men,  if  they  discharged  their  functions  honestly, 
would  be  a  great  boon,  but  if  they  should  fall  away, 
the  direst  calamity.  Since,  however,  it  would  be 
veiy  tedious  in  such  a  volume  as  this,  to  reckon  up 
the  successions  of  all  the  Churches,  we  do  put  to 
confusion  all  those  who,  in  whatsoever  manner, 
whether  by  an  evil  self-pleasing,  by  vain  glory,  or  by 


Must  All  Churches  Agree  With  Rome?        265 

blindness  and  perverse  opinion,  assemble  in  un- 
authorized meetings,  by  indicating  that  tradition, 
derived  from  the  Apostles,  of  the  very  great,  very 
ancient,  and  universally-known  Church  founded  and 
organized  at  Rome  by  the  two  most  glorious  Apostles, 
Peter  and  Paul,  as  also  the  faith  preached  to  men, 
which  comes  down  to  our  time  by  means  of  the 
successions  of  the  bishops.  For  it  is  a  matter  of 
necessity  that  everjr  Church  should  agree  with  this 
Church  on  account  of  its  preeminent  authority,  that 
is,  the  faithful  everywhere,  inasmuch  as  the  Apostol- 
ical tradition  has  been  preserved  continuously  by 
those  who  exist  everywhere." 

It  will  be  sufficiently  clear  that  Trenseus  regarded 
the  essentials  of  Christian  doctrine  as  proved  by  a 
tradition  which  could  not  possibly  admit  error,  being 
(1)  universal,  and  because  universal,  (2)  certainly  un- 
broken in  its  descent.  But  his  last  sentence  raises  an 
important  question.  What  did  he  mean  by  saying 
that  every  other  Church  must  agree  with  the  Church 
at  Rome?  Well,  in  the  first  place,  he  said  nothing 
of  the  sort.  We  have  no  complete  copy  of  this  work 
in  Greek,  as  Irenseus  wrote  it.  This  is  one  of  the 
passages  where  we  must  depend  upon  an  awkward 
Latin  translation.  What  is  given  above  is  the 
Edinburgh  translation,  which  certainly  does  not 
seem  to  make  much  sense.  Here,  on  the  other  hand, 
is  a  translation  from  a  scholar  of  the  Roman  Com- 
munion (Berington  and  Kirk's  Faith  of  Catholics,  i. 
252),  which  is  less  favorable  to  Roman  claims  and 
much  more  accurate :  "  For  to  this  Church,  on 
account  of  more  potent  principality,  it  is  necessary 


The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 


that  every  Church  (that  is,  those  who  are  on  every 
side  faithful)  resort;  in  which  Church  ever  by  those 
who  are  on  every  side  has  been  preserved  the  tra- 
dition which  is  from  the  Apostles." 

"Resort  to"?  Or  "agree  with"?  Which  is 
right  ?  Convenire  ad  is  ordinary  Latin  for  "  resort 
to  "  ;  convenire  cum  for  to  "  agree  with."  A  Latin 
writer  ought  to  be  no  more  able  to  confound  the  two, 
than  an  English  writer  to  say,  "  I  go  to  the  Baptist 
Church  every  week,"  when  he  means,  "I  go  with 
the  Baptist  Church  every  time.'1  This  Latin  version 
does  not  say,  "  agree  with,"  but  "  resort  to."  Prob- 
ably it  says  what  it  means,  and  what  Irenseus 
meant.  But  whatever  was  meant,  we  must  observe 
the  reason  for  singling  out  this  Church  from  Churches 
generally.  The  argument  runs  thus  :  It  is  by  the 
agreement  of  all  Churches  that  the  faith  of  Chris- 
tians is  proved  to  be  a  revelation  from  God,  for  if 
all  agree  in  reporting  one  message  received  from  the 
Lord  through  the  Apostles,  then  plainly  there  was  a 
message,  and  it  has  not  been  changed.  But  it  would 
be  tedious  to  go  through  a  list  of  hundreds  of 
Churches,  showing  how  the  faith  came  down  from 
the  Apostles  through  a  succession  of  bishops  in 'each. 
There  is  one  Church  in  which  the  agreement  of  all 
the  Churches  is  mirrored  because  there  the  tradition 
of  the  faith  has  been  preserved  by  witnesses  coming 
from  all  parts  of  the  world.  Christians  from  all  the 
world  over  have  business  that  brings  them  to  the 
imperial  city.  They  come  there  and  are  at  unity 
with  the  local  Church.  Then  in  that  Church  the 
faith  is  actually  preserved  by  the  testimony  of  all  the 


Non-Roman  Visitors  Make  Roman  Tradition.  267 

Churches  of  the  Christian  world  at  once.  Whether 
Irenseus  meant  to  say  that  all  Churches  had  to  come 
visiting  the  Roman  Church  on  errands,  because  of 
that  city's  secular  preeminence,  or  that  every  Church 
must  necessarily1  agree  with  this  one,  because  of  a 
superiority  which  presently  appears  to  be  a  superi- 
ority of  news-gathering,  one  thing  is  clear.  He  says 
that  the  Apostolic  tradition  was  preserved  in  the 
Roman  Church,  not  by  an  infallible  pope,  not  by  a 
successor  of  St.  Peter,  not  by  a  Vicar  of  Christ, 
not  by  anybody  living  in  Rome  at  all,  but  by  the 
Christians  from  abroad,  the  faithful  on  every  side. 
That  was  why  one  might  use  the  Roman  tradition  as 
being  just  as  good  as  Catholic  tradition,  simply  be- 
cause visitors  coming  in  from  all  quarters  made  it 
really  to  be  a  Catholic  tradition.  And  this,  be  it 
remembered,  was  not  simply  a  tradition  of  what 
Christians  had  always  believed,  but  of  what  Jesus 
Christ  had  called  them  to  believe. 

2.  In  opposition  to  Gnostic  heresy,  which  taught 
that  the  material  creation  was  essentially  evil,  and 
that  the  only  way  to  save  men  from  sin  was  to  re- 
move them  forever  out  of  the  flesh,  Irenseus  was 
led  to  dwell  with  special  love  and  reverence  on  the 
doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God.2     So 

1Tbis  phrase  is  worth  noticing.  It  is  not  one  of  moral  duty, 
"Every  Church  must  do  this  or  be  wrong,"  but  one  of  pure  me- 
chanical necessity,  "Every  Church  has  got  to  do  this  and  cannot 
help  itself."  Of  course,  having  to  go  often  to  Rome  on  busiuess 
was  just  such  a  mechanical  necessity,  and  agreeing  with  the 
Roman  Christians  in  the  faith  was  not.  For  a  delightful  analysis 
of  this  passage,  see  Rev.  F.  W.  Puller's  The  Primitive  Saints 
and  the  See  of  Rome,  pp.  31-43. 

2  As  many  readers  will  have  no  definite  idea  of  what  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Incarnation  is,   we  venture  to  quote  a  good  modern 


268  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

far  from  matter  being  essentially  evil,  it  was  the 
eternal  purpose  of  God  to  take  a  created  nature  into 
union  with  Himself,  and  in  the  Person  of  the  Divine 
Son  to  be  made  flesh,  and  that  forever.  Man,  says 
Trenseus,  was  made  after  the  image  of  God  at  the 
beginning,  but  because  the  Divine  Word  was  still 
invisible,  man  could  not  see  that  image,  and  so  the 
more  readily  fell  away  from  the  Divine  likeness. 
"  When,  however,  the  Word  of  God  was  made  flesh, 
He  established  both  points  :  for  He  both  showed  forth 
the  image  truly,  Himself  becoming  that  which  was 
the  image  of  Himself;  and  He  restored  the  likeness 
securely,  making  man  to  be  like  the  invisible  Father 
through  the  visible  Word"  (V.  xvi.  2).  It  was 
not  merely  to  show  an  example  of  what  man  should 
be,  that  the  Word  was  made  man.  Irenseus  is  very 
strong  on  that.  He  had  to  be  made  man,  so  as  to  be 
able  to  communicate  to  other  men  the  power  of  a 
sinless  life.  "  How  shall  man  enter  into  God,  if  God 
did  not  really  enter  into  man?"  (IV.  xxxiii.  4). 
Many  Christians  of  to  day  suppose  that  the  indwell- 
ing of  the  Holy  Ghost  constitutes  the  supernatural 
life  of  the  Christian.  Not  so  Irenseus.  Not  only 
does  he  argue  for  the  necessity  of  the  Incarnation  on 
the  ground  that "  unless  man  had  overcome  the  enemy 


statement  of  that  ancient  and  Catholic  verity  from  Article  ii.  of 
the  xxxix.  Articles  of  Religion  of  the  Anglican  Communion. 
"The  Son,  which  is  the  Word  of  the  Father,  begotten  from  ever- 
lasting of  the  Father,  the  very  and  eternal  God,  and  of  one  sub- 
stance with  the  Father,  took  Man's  nature  in  the  womb  of  the 
blessed  Virgin,  of  her  substance  :  so  that  two  whole  and  perfect 
Natures,  that  is  to  say,  the  Godhead  and  Manhood,  were 
joined  together  in  one.Person,  never  to  be  divided,  whereof  is  one 
Christ,  very  God  and  very  Man." 


Belief  of  Irenaeus  in  Infant  Regeneration.     269 


of  man,  the  enemy  would  not  have  been  legitimately 
vanquished  "  (III.  xviii.  7),  but  in  his  next  chapter 
he  goes  on  to  say  that  we  must  be  saved  by  a  gift  of 
human  life,  triumphant,  holy  human  life,  that  pro- 
ceeds from  an  immortal  body,  and  is  ordained  to 
live  in  such  a  body  forever. 

Following  out  this  line  of  thought  and  a  curious 
notion  that  our  Lord  had  lived  to  be  fifty  years  old 
(drawn  probably  by  a  too  hasty  inference  from  St. 
John  viii.  57),  Irenaeus  held  that  it  was  part  of  the 
divine  plan  that  our  Lord  should  live  through  all 
conditions  of  man's  growth,  even  to  old  age,  that  He 
might  have  a  saving  power  specially  adapted  to  any 
need.  "  He  came  to  save  all  who  through  means  of 
Himself  are  born  again  to  God, — infants,  and  chil- 
dren, and  boys,  and  youths,  and  old  men.  He  there- 
fore passed  through  every  age  "  ( II.  xxii.  4  ).  The 
notion  is  not  worth  mentioning  in  itself,  but  it  illus- 
strates  the  feeling  of  Irenaeus  as  to  the  means  of 
salvation,  and  incidentally  it  makes  clear  an  im- 
portant point  in  his  sacramental  theology.  He 
believed  in  infant  regeneration  through  baptism. 
Infants  are  expressly  included  among  those  who  have 
been  "  born  again  to  God."  So  in  III.  xvii.  1,  we 
find  him  identifying  regeneration  with  baptism  as 
Justin  Martyr  did, —  "  And  again,  giving  to  the  dis- 
ciples the  power  of  regeneration  into  God,  He  said 
to  them,  Go  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in 
the  Name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost"  Manifestly,  power  to  baptize  is  to 
Irenaeus  power  to  impart  to  another  person  a  share 
in  the  Incarnate  Life  of  Jesus  Christ. 


270  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Quite  correspondingly  he  teaches,  again  in  closest 
harmony  with  Justin  Martyr,  that  the  bread  and 
wine  of  the  Christian  Eucharist  are  material  ele- 
ments taken  into  union  with  God,  and  so  made 
vehicles  of  a  wonderful  spiritual  power.  We  cannot 
possibly  understand  the  thought  of  Irenasus  and 
Justin  without  setting  clearly  before  ourselves  what 
Christian  people  are  in  the  habit  of  thinking  about 
these  subjects  now.  About  the  Holy  Eucharist,  then, 
there  are  among  English-speaking  Christians  of  to- 
day four  main  lines  of  thought,  and  the  language  of 
the  early  writers  will  not  quite  fit  any  one  of  them. 

(a)  The  Zwinglian  theory  says,  "  There  is  no 
power  at  all  in  this  ordinance,  only  a  bare  commem- 
oration by  empty  sjanbols.  Sacrament  it  is  not, 
being  only  a  community  supper  touched  with  a  de- 
vout sentiment."  All  Christian  antiquity  abhors 
this  notion,  or  would  have,  if  it  had  ever  heard  of  it ! 
The  Agape,  or  love-feast,  they  knew,  which  was  a 
supper,  and  the  Eucharist  they  knew,  which  was  sac- 
rament and  sacrifice.     They  did  not  confound  them. 

(b)  John  Calvin  taught — and  in  this  he  has  a  multi- 
tude of  followers, — that  the  consecrated  bread  and 
wine  were  mere  symbols  in  themselves,  but  that  the 
faithful,  faithfully  receiving  them,  were  really  united 
to  the  Lord  Jesus  in  His  bodily  life.  "  Christ  pres- 
ent in  the  Sacrament,  but  not  in  the  Elements,"  is  a 
favorite  phrase  in  which  that  theory  is  summed  up. 
All  ancient  Christianity,  however,  regarded  the 
hallowed  Elements  as  certainly  instinct  with  power. 

(c)  A  numerous  body  of  Anglican  writers — one 
may  call  them,  for  convenience,  the  "  Oxford  School  " 


Modern  Eucharistic  Theories.  271 

— maintain  that  these  Elements  are  called  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  our  Lord  because  our  Lord's  natural 
Flesh  and  Blood  have  a  supernatural  manner  of 
presence  there,  "  under  the  veils  of  bread  and  wine." 
The  early  writers  do  not  speak  in  that  tone.  None 
of  them  speak  of  our  Lord's  Body  as  present  "  in  "  or 
"under  "  the  Sacramental  veil,  or  species,  in  any  way, 
for  three  hundred  years  from  the  Church's  founding. 
A  phrase  of  Tertullian's  about  our  Lord's  consecra- 
ting "  His  blood  in  wine  "  is  no  exception,  neither  is 
a  phrase  of  a  similar  kind  from  St.  Cyprian.  Both 
men  would  have  said,  with  Irenaeus,  "The  wine  is 
the  Blood  of  our  Lord,"  not  "  The  wine  contains  the 
blood  of  our  Lord."  Tertullian's  phrase  "  In  the 
bread  is  understood  His  Body "  {Be  Oratione^  vi.), 
does  not  mean  "  His  Body  is  understood  to  be  in  the 
bread."  (c/)  The  Roman  dogma  teaches  that  the 
bread  and  wine  cease  to  be  bread  and  wine  essen- 
tially, and  become  by  exchange  of  "  substance," 
whatever  that  may  mean,  the  Body  and  Blood  of  our 
Lord.  Gnostics,  it  may  be  submitted,  would  have 
taken  much  comfort  from  that  teaching,  if  they  had 
met  with  it  in  the  second  century.  "  Created  things 
pass  away,"  they  would  have  said,  "and  a  Divine 
manifestation  takes  their  place.  That  is  what  we 
have  always  said  of  the  Incarnation.  The  bread  and 
wine  once  consecrated  are  no  longer  bread  and  wine. 
The  flesh  assumed  by  the  Christ  was  no  longer  real, 
human,  suffering  flesh."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  how- 
ever. Catholic  writers  argued  expressly  from  the 
Eucharist  against  the  Gnostics  and  in  favor  of  the 


272  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

reality  of  our  Lord's  "  earthly  "  part.  What  now 
says  Irenseus  ? 

"  How  can  they  say  that  the  flesh  which  is 
nourished  with  the  Body  of  the  Lord  and  with  His 
Blood,  goes  to  corruption  and  does  not  partake  of 
life?  .  .  .  Our  opinion  is  in  accordance  with  the 
Eucharist,  and  the  Eucharist  in  turn  establishes  our 
opinion.  For  we  offer  to  Him  His  own,  announcing 
consistently  the  fellowship  and  union  of  the  flesh  and 
Spirit.  For  as  the  bread,  which  is  produced  from  the 
earth,  when  it  receives  the  Invocation  of  God,  is  no 
longer  common  bread,  but  the  Eucharist,  consisting 
of  two  realities,  an  earthly  and  a  heavenly,  so  also 
our  bodies,  when  they  receive  the  Eucharist,  are  no 
longer  corruptible,  having  the  hope  of  the  resurrec- 
tion to  eternity"  (IV.  xviii.  5). 

"  When,  therefore,  the  mingled  cup l  and  the 
manufactured  bread  receive  the  Word  of  God,  and 
the  Eucharist  of  the  Blood  and  the  Body  of  Christ  is 
made,  from  which  things  the  substance  of  our  flesh 
is  increased  and  supported,  how.  can  they  affirm  that 
the  flesh  is  incapable  of  receiving  the  gift  of  God, 
which  is  life  eternal,  when  it  is  nourished  from  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord  and  is  a  member  of 
Him? — Even  as  the  blessed  Paul  declares  in  his 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  that  ive  are  members  of  His 
Body,  of  His  flesh  and  of  His  bones.  He  does  not 
speak  these  words  of  some  spiritual  and  invisible 
man,  for  a  spirit  has  not  bones  nor  flesh  ;  but  the 

1The  wine  of  the  Christian  Eucharist  was  always  mixed  with 
water.  We  have  seen  the  custom  stated  in  Justin  Martyr's  de- 
scription, pp.  151,  153. 


The  Language  of  Irenseus  not  Modem.      273 

arrangement  is  an  actual  man  consisting  of  flesh  and 
nerves  and  bones, — that  which  is  nourished  by  the 
cup  which  is  His  Blood,  and  receives  increase  from 
the  bread  which  is  His  Body.  And  just  as  a  cutting 
from  the  vine  planted  in  the  ground  fructifies  in  its 
season,  or  as  a  corn  of  wheat  falling  into  the  earth 
and  becoming  decomposed,  rises  with  manifold  in- 
crease by  the  Spirit  of  God,  who  contains  all  things, 
and  then  through  the  wisdom  of  God  serves  for 
the  use  of  men,  and  having  received  the  Word  of 
God  becomes  the  Eucharist,  which  is  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ,  so  also  our  bodies,  being  nourished 
by  it,  and  being  deposited  in  the  earth  and  suffering 
corruption  there,  shall  rise  at  their  appointed  time" 
(V.  ii.  3). 

It  will  be  seen  that  Irenseus  does  not  speak  the 
language  of  any  of  the  four  modern  views.  As 
against  the  Zwinglian  teaching,  he  finds  in  this  Sacra- 
ment a  mighty  power.  As  against  the  Calvinist 
speculations,  he  finds  that  the  Elements  themselves 
receive  the  Word  of  God  and  become  great.  As 
against  the  Roman  definition,  he  recognizes  in  the 
Eucharist  two  parts,  an  earthly  and  a  heavenly,  and 
the  earthly  part  not  changed  into  the  heavenly  part, 
but  both  abiding  together.  As  against  the  Oxford 
view,  he  nowhere  says  that  the  "heavenly  reality," 
is  the  glorified  Body  of  our  Lord,  but  does  con- 
tinually speak  of  the  bread,  the  "  earthly  reality," 
as  itself  made  to  be  "  the  Lord's  Body "  by  the 
change  which  brings  the  "heavenly  reality"  into 
union  with  it.  To  the  present  writer  it  seems  that 
all  early  Christian  writers  who  touch  upon  the  sub- 
R 


274  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

ject  agree  in  teaching  this:  The  Eucharistic  Ele- 
ments of  bread  and  wine  are  made  to  be  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  our  Lord  by  a  consecration  which  makes 
them  vehicles  of  His  Incarnate  Life,  and  therefore  a 
Body  and  Blood  of  His,  superadded  to  those  which 
He  had  by  nature.  The  Church  itself  is  called  the 
Body  of  Christ  for  such  a  reason,  not  because  we,  the 
members  of  the  Church,  are  changed  into  our  Lord's 
own  natural  flesh  and  blood,  nor  yet,  surely, 
as  a  mere  lifeless  symbol,  not  truly  animated  by  His 
power.  Why  could  not  such  a  phrase  be  justified  in 
the  same  way  in  connection  with  the  Eucharist  ?  In 
that  case  the  Sacramental  Body,  of  hallowed  bread, 
would  be,  like  the  Mystical  Body,  of  the  faithful 
people,  an  addition  to  our  Lord's  Natural  Body,  an 
"  extension  "  of  it,  so  to  speak,  identified,  but  not 
identical  with  it. 

Take  these  words,  "  The  mingled  cup  and  the  man- 
ufactured bread  receive  the  Word  of  God,  and  the 
Eucharist  of  the  Blood  and  the  Body  of  Christ  is 
made,  from  which  things  the  substance  of  our 
flesh  is  increased  and  nourished,  "  and  compare  them 
with  what  we  have  heard  (p.  152),  from  Justin 
Martyr, — "  Not  as  common  bread  and  common  drink 
do  we  receive  these  ;  but  in  like  manner  as  Jesus 
Christ  our  Saviour  having  been  made  flesh  by  the 
Word  of  God,  had  both  flesh  and  blood  for  our 
salvation,  so  likewise  have  we  been  taught  that  the 
food  which  is  blessed  by  the  prayer  of  the  Word 
which  is  from  Him,  and  from  which  our  flesh  and 
blood  are  by  transmutation  nourished,  is  the  flesh 
and    blood    of    that    Jesus  who    was   made    flesh." 


My  Body, — that  is,  the  Figure  of  My  Body.    275 

Both  Justin  and  Irenseus  hold  that  bread  and  wine, 
retaining  still  their  natural  qualities,  as,  for  in- 
stance, the  power  to  nourish  our  bodies,  are  brought 
into  a  union  with  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  which  is 
in  some  way  parallel  with  the  union  of  His  Divinity 
and  His  humanity  in  the  Incarnation.  They  never 
try  to  say  what  the  heavenly  part  of  the  Sacrament 
is.  Probably  they  did  not  think  that  they  knew. 
But  certainly  it  is  the  hallowed  Elements  them- 
selves, as  having  had  some  heavenly  reality  added 
to  them,  and  not  the  Power  or  Powers  thus  addend, 
which  are  called  by  these  writers  t;  the  Body  of 
our  Lord  "  and  "  the  Blood  of  our  Lord." 

Here  also  is  the  key  to  a  strange  and  often- 
quoted  phrase  of  Tertullian,  which  is  therefore  best 
dealt  with  in  this  place.  Tertullian,  who  habit- 
ually calls  the  consecrated  bread  the  Body  of  our 
Lord,  once  speaks  of  it  as  a  figure  of  His  Body. 
Controversial  writers  who  hold  that  it  is  a  figure 
of  our  Lord's  Body,  but  not  really  His  Body  at  all, 
and  who  could  not  be  hired  to  use  Tertullian's 
habitual  language,  pounce  upon  this  place  as  show- 
ing that  Tertullian,  and  all  the  early  Christians, 
thought  with  them.  Here  are  Tertullian's  words, 
arguing  against  the  Gnostic  Marcion,  who  would 
not  acknowledge  that  our  Lord  could  have  had  a 
real  body  of  flesh  :  "  The  bread  which  He  took  and 
distributed  to  His  disciples,  that  He  made  to  be 
a  Body  of  His,  saying,  This  is  My  Body, — that  is, 
the  figure  of  My  Body.  A  figure,  however,  there 
could  not  have  been,  unless  there  wTere  first  a  verita- 
ble Body."     Plainly,  Tertullian  holds,  with  Irenseus 


276  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

and  Justin,  that  the  consecrated  bread  is  made  to 
be  a  trite  Body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that 
"Body  of  His,"  which  the  Church  knows  so  well, 
being  a  second  Body,  so  to  say,  and  thus  a  figure 
and  likeness  of  the  original  Body.  "  He  made 
bread  to  be  His  Sacramental  Body,  and  thereby  a 
figure  of  His  Natural  Body,  "  so  runs  the  argument, 
"  and  He  could  not  have  given  us  a  symbol 
of  His  Natural  Body,  if  His  Natural  Body 
had  not  had  a  real  existence  of  its  own."  Certainly, 
Tertullian,  thus  calling  the  hallowed  bread  a  "  fig- 
ure "  would  never  have  acknowledged  that  it  was  "a 
mere  figure,"  carrying  no  great  Divine  Presence  of 
its  own. 

3.  Our  illustrations  of  the  doctrine  of  Irenaeus  are 
not  given  to  show  how  he  was  beginning  to  de- 
part from  previously  prevailing  habits  of  Christian 
thought.  The  case  stands  precisely  the  other  way. 
In  Irenseus,  with  his  intense  conservatism,  his  con- 
stant anxiety  to  hold  the  Church  to  the  teachings  of 
the  "  elders, "  we  have  just  the  man  to  give  us  a 
faithful  report  of  what  was  commonly,  and  as  one 
may  say,  centrally,  believed  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  century.  And  what  is  still  more  impor- 
tant, ifthere  was  any  difference  between  the  general 
Christian  beliefs  of  that  time  and  those  of  fifty  or 
sixty  years  before,  he  at  an}*-  rate  did  not  realize  it, 
had  no  suspicion  of  it.  Irenseus  is  always  a  wit- 
ness. What  he  speaks  is  matter  of  long  tradition 
and  general  consent.  This  is  the  case  even  with 
the  third  and  last  subject  on  which  we  are  now  to 
hear  his  teaching,  the  subject  of  "  the  last  things." 


Views   Generally  Held,  but  not  Necessary.     217 

When  such  a  man  as  Ireiueus  writes  that  "the  clay 
of  the  Lord  is  as  a  thousand  years,  and  in  six  days 
created  things  were  completed ,  it  is  evident,  there- 
fore, that  they  will  come  to  an  end  at  the  six 
thousandth  year,"  it  is  pretty  sure  from  his  general 
habit  of  mind  that  he  is  giving  us  a  piece  of  argu- 
ment that  was  commonly  held  as  good  in  his  time. 
Yet  Irenseus,  like  Justin  Martyr  a  generation  ear- 
lier, makes  a  clear  distinction  between  points  which 
a  man  must  believe  to  be  a  good  Christian,  and 
others  which  he  was  sure  of,  which  the  majority  of 
Christians  held,  but  which  any  Christian  was  at  lib- 
erty to  reject.  In  the  class  of  necessary  truths  came 
two  great  revelations, — that  Jesus  Christ  will  come 
again  in  the  body  of  His  flesh  to  judge  the  quick 
and  the  dead,  and  that  all  the  dead  will  have  a  bodily 
resurrection,  without  which  none  can  enter  into  the 
fulness  of  their  heavenly  reward.  In  the  class  of 
truths  generally  held  in  the  Church,  but  not  made 
a  condition  of  communion  or  a  measure  of  orthodoxy, 
came  the  opinion  that  the  whole  Jewish  people  would 
be  converted  in  the  last  days,  and  restored  to  their  own 
land  to  occupy  Jerusalem  gloriously  rebuilt,  a  gen- 
eral line  of  extremely  literal  interpretations  of  the 
Old  Testament,  as  for  instance,  that  in  the  new 
earth  the  lion  will  really  eat  strata  like  the  ox,  and 
the  belief  that  there  will  be  two  literal  resurrections 
from  the  grave,  one  of  God's  covenant  people  of  all  the 
ages,  rising  from  death  and  caught  up  to  meet  the  Lord 
in  the  air,  and  then,  after  a  thousand  years  (cf.  Rev. 
xx.  4-6),  a  general  resurrection  of  all  the  rtst  of  the 
dead,  leading  up  to  such  a  judgment  as  that  of  St. 


278  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Matthew  xxv.  31-40,  in  which  even  the  saved  are 
obviously  persons  who  had  not  known  Christ  and 
His  Gospel,  when  on  earth. 

The  present  writer  s3Tiipathizes  profoundly  with 
the  early  Church  in  much  of  its  thought  about  these 
matters,  a  kind  of  thought  from  which  the  Chuich 
of  the  next  century  curiously  swung  away  ;  but  he 
feels  bound  to  exhibit  a  part  of  Irenseus's  thought 
with  which  no  one  now  can  possibly  sympathize,  and 
it  seems  proper  first  to  remark  that  it  should  occasion 
no  surprise  if  in  the  Church's  childhood  some  of  the 
Church's  favorite  ideas  were  childish.  In  all  the 
main  lines  of  its  theology,  one  may  fairly  claim,  the 
Church  was  guided  and  safe -guarded  by  a  faithful 
tradition  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  and  of  the  teaching 
of  that  most  manly  theologian,  St.  Paul.  Of  course, 
on  the  other  hand,  such  traditions  could  not  cover 
the  whole  field  of  Old  and  New  Testament  interpre- 
tation. Left  to  itself  the  second  century  mind  was 
apt  to  be  painfully  literal,  turning  poetry  into  prose. 
Nay,  even  what  passed  as  tradition  was  not  always 
true.  For  Irenseus  quotes  "  the  elders  who  saw  John, 
the  disciple  of  the  Lord,"  as  saying— he  mentions 
Papias  by  name  as  having  written  it  in  a  book — that 
they  had  heard  from  him  how  the  Lord  used  to  teach 
in  regard  to  these  times.  Then  follow  words  which 
St.  John  was  supposed  to  have  quoted  from  our  Lord 
Himself: 

"  The  days  will  come  in  which  vines  shall  grow, 
each  having  ten  thousand  branches,  and  in  each 
branch  ten  thousand  twigs,  and  in  each  true  twig 
ten  thousand  shoots,  and  in  each  one  of  the  shoots 


Quotations  from  the  Elders  in  Irenseus.       279 


ten  thousand  clusters,  and  on  every  one  of  the  clus- 
ters ten  thousand  grapes,  and  every  grape  when 
pressed  will  give  five  and  twenty  metretse  [as  if  one 
should  say  200  gallons]  of  wine.  And  when  any 
one  of  the  saints  shall  lay  hold  of  a  cluster,  another 
shall  cry  out,  'I  am  a  better  cluster,  take  me ;  bless 
the  Lord  through  me.' " 

Some  unrecorded  parable  of  our  Lord  may,  indeed, 
have  been  coarsened  into  this,  but  we  feel  a  world  of 
difference  between  its  tone  and  that  of  our  New 
Testaments.  Perhaps  there  is  more  trace  of  a  real 
memory  of  our  Lord's  teaching  in  another  quotation 
from  the  "elders"  on  differences  of  reward  in  the 
future  life, — 

44  Then  those  who  are  deemed  worthy  of  an  abode 
in  Heaven  shall  go  there,  others  shall  enjoy  the  de- 
lights of  Paradise,  and  others  shall  possess  the 
splendors  of  the  City;  for  everywhere  the  Saviour 
shall  be  seen  according  as  they  who  see  Him  shall 
be  worthy." 

At  least,  our  Irenseus  with  his  indiscriminating 
literalism  is  more  worthy,  and  sees  more  of  God, 
than  one  who  narrows  and  stiffens  his  mind  against 
receiving  words  from  God  at  all. 

II.  Tertullian.  We  have  now  to  turn  to  a  dif- 
ferent scene  and  to  a  curiously  different  character. 
From  southern  France  we  cross  the  Mediterranean 
to  that  great,  proud,  luxurious  merchant  city  of 
Carthage,  once  Rome's  dreaded  rival,  now  greatest 
of  Rome's  subject  cities  in  the  West.  From  a  Church 
which  spoke  the  Celtic  tongue  of  Gaul,  something 
akin  to  modern  Welsh  or  Irish,  but  whose  merchants 


280  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

had  Greek  connections,  and  whose  educated  people 
preferred  to  read  books  in  Greek,  we  turn  to  a 
Church  which  spoke  a  Semitic  language,  the  Punic, 
of  the  same  family  with  Hebrew,  but  far  separated 
from  it,  and  whose  educated  men  depended  rather 
upon  Latin  as  the  tongue  of  literature  and  learning. 
Our  new  hero  is  to  be  in  a  sense  the  founder  of 
Latin  Christianity,  for  it  was  he  who  first  wrote 
books  of  Christian  doctrine  and  practice  in  the 
Latin  tongue,  and  by  coining  new  words  to  express 
Christian  ideas,  or  taking  old  words  and  pouring 
Christian  meaning  into  them,  made  for  the  Church  a 
Latin  speech.  We  may  well  regard  with  solemn 
interest  the  Church  which  produced  the  first  Latin 
I3ible,  and  the  writer  who  more  than  any  other  de- 
termined in  what  Latin  words  the  Church  should 
embody  her  teaching. l  Yet  it  may  not  be  denied 
that  the  Church  was  a   bad  Church,  and  the  great 


1  As  an  example  of  Ibe  importance  of  such  determinations,  take 
the  word  for  "baptize."  Commonly  the  Greek  word  is  carried 
into  the  new  tongue  bodily  as  in  the  "  baptize  "  of  the  Englisb, 
or  "  baptizare  "  of  the  Latin  Bible.  Tertullian  met  the  difficulty 
squarely.  The  Greek  had  in  it  two  ideas,  more  or  less  pro- 
nouncedly apparent  in  different  uses,  "dip"  and  "dye." 
"Dip"  was  in  Latin  " mergere"  ;  "dye"  was  " tingere."  We 
may  compare  "  submerge  "  and  "  tincture."  Tertullian,  believ- 
ing that  the  chief  thought  of  the  New  Testament  word  was  that 
of  changing  the  quality  of  an  object  by  the  free  application  of 
fluid,  boldly  used  tingere  as  bis  word  for  the  baptismal  act.  It 
was  to  him  a  matter  of  spiritual  regeneration,  not  of  material 
submersion.  There  was  much  theology  in  calling  baptism  a  dye- 
ing of  a  man,  so  that  his  soul  and  all  his  life  took  on  another  color 
in  the  laver  of  regeneration.  To  translate  Tertullian's  word  by 
"sprinkle,"  as  in  De  Baptismo  ii.,  or  by  "immerse,"  as  in  Adver- 
sus  Praxeamxx.v\.,  is  grossly  unfair  to  Tertullian's  deliberate  inten- 
tion. Other  words  which  appear  first  in  Tertullian  in  their  Chris- 
tian meaning  are  Trinitas,  Persona,  Substantia,  Sacramentum,  and 
Liberum  Arbitrium  (for  "  free  will  "). 


Evil  Heredity  of  the   Church  of  Carthage.    281 

writer  hopelessl}'  on  the  wrong  side  of  some  of  the 
chief  questions  of  the  Church's  life. 

Why  was  the  Church  of  Carthage  a  bad  Church? 
It  was,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Phrygians,  largely  a  mat- 
ter of  heredity.  The  original  Libyan  race  was  of  a 
good  stock.  It  survives  in  the  tribes  of  the  Berbers 
to  this  day,  but  Christianity  did  not  go  out  into  its 
hills  and  conquer  it.  Masters  of  the  Gentile  coast-line 
and  the  wealth-producing  mines  for  centuries,  had 
been  the  Phoenicians,  or  as  they  called  themselves  all 
through,  Canaanites,  an  off-shoot  from  those  nations 
which  had  become  so  corrupted  that  God  Himself  had 
ordered  their  destruction  1,500  years  before.  "  They 
brought  with  them,"  says  Archbishop  Benson  in  his 
Cyprian,  "  worships  which  had  the  fascinations  of 
orgy,  cruelty,  and  secrecy,  worships  ever  deadliest 
to  the  religion  of  revelation."  The  worship  of  Mo- 
loch with  children  passed  through  the  altar-fires,  the 
worship  of  Astarte,  with  consecrated  licentiousness, 
these  were  among  the  forces  that  had  been  brutalizing 
Carthaginian  character  for  ages.  And  now  the  race 
was  a  conquered  race  with  tone  lowered  by  loss  of 
national  independence.  Why  conquered,  also?  And 
the  answer  is,  partly  because  it  had  been  undermined 
by  its  own  earlier  degradations.  "  Punic  faith  "  had 
been  for  generations  a  byword  for  treachery.  Be- 
fore Carthage  ceased  to  be  an  independent  power,  its 
political  life  was  honeycombed  with  shameless  brib- 
ery, which  the  Rome  of  the  same  period  would  have 
rewarded  with  death. 

A  traveller,  waiting  in  the  fourth  century,  calls  the 
Africans  of  his  day  "  faithless  and  cunning."    "  There 


282  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

may  be  some  good  people  among  them,  but  not 
many."  Those  who  know  anything  of  the  deadly 
strifes  of  Catholic  and  Donatist  in  that  period  will 
recognize  that  a  singularly  low  type  of  Christianity 
prevailed  in  North  Africa,  even  when  it  was  sup- 
posed to  have  become  a  Christian  land.  Later  still, 
the  monk  Salvian  mourns  that  it  took  an  invasion  of 
heretic  Vandals  to  purge  the  corruption  of  a  Chris- 
tian people.  Earnestness  will  make  martyrs  in  any 
age.  The  second  century  had  hundreds  and  thou- 
sands of  them.  But  it  has  taken  centuries  of  ear- 
nestness to  produce  such  standards  of  Christian  living 
as  bind  even  our  slack  Christians  of  to-day.  Ear- 
nestness grows  at  once  out  of  any  true  conversion, 
but  it  takes  a  great  while  for  high  attainment  to 
grow  out  of  earnestness.  Africa  could  produce  mar- 
tyrs more  readily  than  saints.  Some  saints,  indeed, 
it  had,  but  the  average  of  its  religious  life  was  low. 
Into  such  an  atmosphere  was  born  Tertullian,  the 
son  of  a  centurion  in  the  Roman  army,  and  pre- 
sumably of  Roman,  not  Carthaginian,  stock,  a  sol- 
dier's son  with  a  soldier's  heart  in  him,  destined  to 
be  a  hero  of  the  militant  Church,  and  perhaps  the 
most  remarkable  man  of  his  day  in  the  whole  west- 
ern world,  but  not  a  saint.  When  he  was  born, 
when  he  became  a  Christian,  when  he  died,  no  scholar 
knows.  The  wisest  guessers  put  his  birth  about  A. 
D.  150.  He  is  said  to  have  lived  to  a  great  age, 
which  could  hardly  be  less  than  eighty.  His  activity 
as  a  writer  seems  to  have  begun  about  A.  D.  197, 
and  to  have  lasted  between  twenty  and  thirty  years. 
He  had  a  remarkably  good  education,  read  widely, 


Tertullian1  s   Character  and   Gifts.  283 


mastered  much,  could  write  books  in  Greek  as  in 
Latin,  though  none  of  his  Greek  works  survive, 
studied  law,  and  made  himself,  if  we  may  trust  Eu- 
sebius  in  this  matter,  "  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
men  at  Rome."  All  that  we  know  of  his  life  as  a 
Christian  belongs  to  Carthage,  but  Christian  he  was 
not  at  first.  "  Christians  are  made,  not  born  so,"  is 
one  of  his  sayings.  He  was  brought  up  in  heathen 
views  and  in  heathen  vices.  Then  he  saw  a  great 
new  light,  and  threw  the  whole  force  of  an  eager, 
passionate,  but  really  powerful  nature  into  the  serv- 
ice of  Jesus  Christ.  Writing  a  treatise  in  praise  of 
Patience,  he  mourns  that  he  is  so  unfit  to  teach  that 
lesson,  being  "  an  extremely  wretched  fellow,  always 
in  a  fever  of  impatience,"  himself.  Such  a  man  was 
not  likely  to  be  a  learner  long  before  he  began  to  be 
a  teacher.  One  may  guess  that  Tertullian's  conver- 
sion did  not  much  precede  his  first  Christian  writ- 
ing,— a  beautiful  and  wise  address  to  some  martyrs 
in  prison, — and  that  his  ordination  as  a  presbyter 
followed  very  closely  after  his  first  literary  effort  in 
the  cause  of  Christ.  From  that  date,  197,  we  cannot 
assign  more  than  seven  years, — it  may  not  have  been 
more  than  three, — before  he  had  imbibed  the  notions 
of  the  unew  prophecy"  and  the  "dispensation  of  the 
Paraclete." 

Tertullian  is  essentially  a  writer.  His  books  are 
the  chief  measure  of  his  effect  upon  the  history  of 
his  age.  They  are  too  long  and  too  many  to  be 
passed  in  review  here,  but  it  should  be  said  that  with 
Tertullian  a  long  book  was  sure  to  be  a  book  rich  in 
ideas.     He  always  filled  his  sentences  with  meaning. 


284  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

As  for  his  style,  Jt  is  hard  to  represent  in  English. 
Perhaps  only  another  Tertullian  could  imagine  how 
Tertullian  would  have  used  our  speech.  "  It  is  terse, 
abrupt,  laconic,  sententious,  nervous,"  says  Doctor 
Schaff,  "  figurative,  full  of  hyperbole,  sudden  turns, 
legal  technicalities,  African  provincialisms,  or  rather 
antiquated  or  vulgar  Latin  isms.  It  abounds-in  Latin- 
ized Greek  words  and  new  expressions,  in  rough- 
nesses, angles,  and  obscurities,  sometimes  like  a  grand 
volcanic  eruption,  belching  precious  stones  and  dross 
in  strange  confusion,  or  like  the  foaming  torrent, 
tumbling  over  the  precipice  of  rocks,  and  carrying 
all  before  it."  "  For  his  opponents  he  had  as  little 
indulgence  and  regard  as  Martin  Luther.  With  the 
adroitness  of  a  special  pleader,  he  entangles  them  in 
self-contradictions,  .  .  .  overwhelms  them  with 
arguments,  sophisms,  apothegms,  and  sarcasms, 
.  .  .  His  polemics  everywhere  leave  marks  of 
blood.  It  is  a  wonder  that  he  was  not  killed  by  the 
heathens,  or  excommunicated  b}r  the  Catholics." 

This  witness  is  true.  Oar  impatient  brother  was 
not  a  fair  man.  He  is  one  of  those  intense  partisans 
who  do  not  convince  as  often  as  the}r  really  might 
haire,  if  they  had  not  been  so  feverishly  anxious  to 
make  points  against  the  people  on  the  other  side. 
He  sometimes  deserves  a  sarcasm  like  Bishop  Kaye's 
(Account  of  the  Writings  of  Tertullian,  p.  421),  where 
he  says  of  a  certain  passage,  "  It  is  hard  to  decide 
which  of  these  three  arguments  is  least  conclusive." 
Yet  this  is  a  great  man  withal.  His  many  books — 
there  remains  to  us  enough  of  his  writing  to  fill 
seven  or  eight  volumes  like  this — may  be  distributed 


Tertullian  as  an  Apologist.  285 

into  three  classes:  Apologetic,  defending  Christi- 
anity against  heathen  and  Jew ;  Dogmatic,  contend- 
ing for  the  Catholic  faith  and  doctrine  against  here- 
tics ;  Practical,  dealing  with  questions  of  Christian 
life  and  duty.  We  must  be  content  with  noting  a 
few  points  that  come  out  in  the  study  of  these  differ- 
ent groups  of  writings. 

1.  The  Apologetic  works  are  notable  in  the  first 
place  for  their  number  and  variety.  Besides  the 
book  known  as  The  Apology,  an  exceptionally  strong 
and  interesting  one,  there  are  an  Address  to  the  Na- 
tions, an  Answer  to  the  Jews,  an  Appeal  to  Scapula, — 
Scapula  was  the  name  of  a  persecuting  pro-consul  of 
Africa  in  the  year  211, — and  a  little  tract  on  The 
Testimony  of  the  Soul.  This  outpouring  suggests  that 
along  with  the  fiery  zeal  of  the  advocate  there  really 
was  some  large  opportunity  for  getting  a  hearing  for 
his  copious  eloquence.  Tertullian,  eager  as  he  was 
to  speak,  was  too  practical  to  go  on  talking  to  empty 
benches.  If  he  wrote  such  a  series  of  apologetics,  it 
means  that  such  volumes  were  coming  to  be  widely 
read.  In  close  connection  with  this  point  is  another. 
The  new  apologist  has  a  new  confidence  in  his  tone. 
In  the  very  first  chapter  of  the  Apology  he  claims  as 
the  great  proof  of  Christianity,  that  its  opponents 
regularly  become  converts,  when  they  get  to  know 
anything  about  it.  "  The  outcry  is  that  the  State  is 
filled  with  Christians, — that  they  are  in  the  fields,  in 
the  citadels,  in  the  islands.  People  make  lamenta- 
tion, as  for  some  calamity,  that  both  sexes,  every 
age  and  condition,  even  high  rank,  are  passing  over 
to  the  profession  of  the  Christian  faith.     And  yet  for 


286  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

all,  their  minds  are  not  awakened  to  the  thought  of 
some  good  they  have  failed  to  notice  in  it." 

In  a  like  spirit  Tertullian  argues  in  chapter  xxxvii. 
against  the  charge  of  treason  brought  because  Chris- 
tians would  not  pay  divine  honors  to  the  emperors. 
Think  how  Christians  are  treated,  is  his  plea,  how 
you  magistrates  torture  and  slay  them,  how  mobs 
stone  them,  and  burn  their  houses,  and  even  tear 
their  dead  from  the  graves  to  heap  abuses  upon 
them, — "No  burial  places  for  the  Christians  !"  was 
actually  a  popular  cry  at  one  time, — and  then  how 
enormous  their  number  has  come  to  be,  how  closely 
banded  together  they  are,  how  utterly  without  fear 
of  death.  "  Yet  banded  together  as  we  are,  ever  so 
ready  to  sacrifice  our  lives,  what  single  case  of  re- 
venge for  injury  can  you  point  to,  though  if  it  were 
held  right  among  us  to  repay  evil  by  evil,  a  single 
night  with  a  torch  or  two  could  achieve  an  ample 
vengeance?  .  .  .  We  are  but  of  yesterday,  and 
we  have  filled  every  place  among  you, — cities,  islands, 
fortresses,  towns,  market-places,  even  your  soldiers' 
camps,  tribes,  companies,  palace,  senate,  forum, — 
we  have  left  you  nothing  but  your  temples !  " 

So  in  his  Answer  to  the  Jews  he  comments  on  Their 
sound  is  gone  out  into  all  lands,  and  reckons  among 
nations  which  have  believed,  "the  varied  races  of 
the  Gsetulians,  and  manifold  confines  of  the  Moors, 
all  the  limits  of  the  Spains,  and  the  diverse  nations 
of  the  Gauls,  and  the  haunts  of  the  Britons,  inac- 
cessible to  the  Romans,  but  subjugated  to  Christ,  and 
of  the  Sarmatians,  and  Dacians,  and  Germans,  and 
Scythians,  and  of  many  remote  nations,  and  of  prov- 


The  New  Note  of  Triumph.  287 

inces  and  islands,  many  to  us  unknown,  and  which 
we  can  scarce  enumerate."1  So,  when  after  a  few 
years  of  rest,  persecution  was  breaking  out  again,  he 
addresses  his  protest  to  the  new  pro-consul,  Scapula, 
and  tells  hiin  (Ad  Scapulam  ii.  and  v.)  that  Chris- 
tians are  almost  the  majority  in  every  city,  and  that 
if  he  persists  in  trying  to  destroy  them  he  must  deci- 
mate Carthage  to  do  it.  "  The  more  you  mow  us 
down,  the  more  you  make  us  grow.  The  blood  of 
Christians  is  seed  "  {Apol.  1.).  That  note  of  triumph 
is  sounded  by  Tertullian,  as  by  no  apologist  before. 

Out  of  the  Ad  Scapulam  one  ought  to  quote  a  fine 
passage  far  in  advance  of  the  age,  and  a  little  in  ad- 
vance of  the  writer  himself  in  some  of  his  moods : 
"  It  is  a  fundamental  human  right,  a  privilege  of  na- 
ture, that  every  man  should  worship  according  to  his 
own  convictions.     One  man's  religion  neither  helps 

1  Of  course,  this  is  more  rhetorical  than  historical.  A  very  few 
converts  in  each  nation  would  suffice,  and  perhaps  Tertullian  put 
in  some  very  distant  tribes  without  waiting  to  hear  from  them  defi- 
nitely. More  especially,  students  who  have  not  studied  should 
receive  with  great  distrust  any  statements  about  the  Early  British 
Church.  There  was  one.  It  sent  to  a  Council  at  Aries,  then 
Arelate,  a  town  in  Southern  Gaul,  three  bishops, — those  of  Lon- 
don, York,  and  another  see,  which  may  have  been  Lincoln,  and 
may  have  been  Caer-Leon  on  Usk.  "It  was  a  poor  and  struggling 
Church,"  says  Mr.  Wakemau  (Introduction  to  the  History  of  the 
Church  of  England,  pp.  1,  2),  "  which  exercised  but  little  influence 
over  the  Celtic  inhabitants  of  the  country, — the  Church  mainly  of 
the  poorer  Roman  provincials.  It  derived  its  existence,  its  ritual, 
and  its  orders  from  its  richer  neighbor,  the  Church  of  Gaul. 
During  two  hundred  years. of  life  under  the  Roman  eagles  it  pro- 
duced no  great  man,  built  no  great  building,  endured  no  serious 
persecution,  sent  out  no  missionaries,  and  was  obliged  to  appeal 
to  Gaul  for  help  in  its  internal  difficulties."  For  our  period  its 
only  really  known  names  are  those  of  the  three  bishops  at  Aries, 
and  that  of  its  first  martyr,  the  Roman  soldier  Alban,  A.  D.  304, 
who  was  made  a  Christian  and  suffered  death  for  it  in  a  single 
day.- 


288  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

nor  harms  another  man.  It  is  assuredly  no  part  of 
religion  to  compel  religion."  The  same  spirit  of 
respect  for  the  human  conscience  and  corresponding 
trust  in  it  comes  out  in  a  place  (Apol.  xvii.),  where 
he  is  speaking  of  the  habitual  phrases  of  even 
heathen  speech,  with  its  "  gods  many," — "  God  is 
good,"  "  God  grant  it,"  "  God  sees  all,"  as  if  recog- 
nizing by  some  instinct  that  there  must  be  one  Su- 
preme Being.  "  Oh!  noble  testimony,"  he  says,  "  of 
the  soul,  which  is  in  its  nature  Christian  !  "  That 
idea  he  shortly  after  embodied  in  a  separate  book, 
On  the  Testimony  of  the  Soul,  insisting  on  the  natural 
correspondence  of  the  soul,  which  is  God's  creature, 
with  Christianity,  which  is  God's  revelation. 

2.  With  Tertullian's  temper  and  gifts  it  was  a 
matter  of  course  that  he  should  be  a  controversialist, 
and  he  wrote  voluminously  against  the  heresies  of 
the  day.  Five  books  Aganst  Marcion,  followed  up 
by  special  treatises  On  the  Flesh  of  Christ,  and  On 
the  Resurrection  of  the  Flesh,  and  a  book  Against  the 
Valentinians,  defended  the  Church's  faith  on  the  side 
of  Gnostic  heresy.  A  book  Against  Hermogenes  and 
another  On  the  Soul  were  directed  against  a  local 
writer  who  offended  this  Puritan  Tertullian  specially 
deeply  by  being  an  artist  and  by  marrying  several 
times.  He  had  married  more  women  than  he  had 
painted,  Tertullian  declared  in  his  bitterness.  It  is 
notable  that  in  the  book  On  the  Soul  he  maintains 
that  souls  are  not  incorporeal.  A  very  gifted  sister 
in  his  congregation  had  once  had  a  soul  shown  to 
her  when  she  fell  into  an  "ecstasy  "  in  time  of  ser- 
vice, and  she  told  him  all  about  it  afterwards.     Late 


On  the  Prescription  of  Heretics.  289 

in  his  career  belongs  his  treatise  nominally  Against 
Praxeas,  whom  he  had  already  brought  back,  bat 
really  against  the  progress  of  the  Sabellian  heresy, 
which  Praxeas  had  forsaken.  We  must  confine  our 
attention  to  an  early  controversial  work,  in  which  he 
restates  the  position  which  we  have  seen  taken  by 
Irenseus. 

On  the  Prescription  of  Heretics.  That  is  the  title 
of  this  remarkable  work,  and  in  that  title  the  whole 
argument  is  condensed.  Prsescriptio  was  a  law-term 
for  a  plea  which  got  in  ahead  of  the  other  party  to  a 
suit,  and  showed  that  for  some  reason  he  had  no 
standing  in  court  at  all.  Such  a  plea,  says  Tertul- 
lian,  has  the  Catholic  Church,  contending  with 
Heresy  before  the  tribunal  of  Reason.  Heresy  will 
claim  to  be  heard  out  of  Holy  Scripture.  Heresy 
will  encourage  itself  with  the  promise,  Seek,  and  ye 
shall  find.  The  answer  is  a  plea  in  prescription. 
Jesus  Christ  taught  certain  truths  to  His  Apostles. 
The  Apostles  went  forth  and  founded  Churches. 
"  From  this,  therefore,"  he  says,  (chapter  xxi.),  "  we 
draw  up  our  rule,  that  since  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
sent  the  Apostles  to  preach,  no  others  ought  to  be 
received  as  preachers  than  those  whom  Christ  ap- 
pointed." The  idea  is  that  there  can  be  no  other 
original  sources  of  knowledge,  no  other  persons  who 
can  claim  to  have  had  a  special  revelation.  This 
cuts  off  the  founders  of  new  religions,  like  the 
Gnostic  systems.  There  follows  presently  another 
rule.  It  is  a  natural  consequence.  Agreement  with 
the  Churches  descended  from  the  Apostles  is  laid 
down  as  a  condition  of  understanding  the  meaning  of 
s 


290  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Holy  Scripture  rightly.  "  Seeking  *'  must  have  the 
truth  for  its  object.  If  God  has  given  you  a  body  of 
certain  truth,  it  will  do  you  no  good  to  seek  or  to. 
find  ideas  whicli  contradict  that  truth.  The  Church 
is  the  place  where  light  shines.  "  You  have  found, 
when  you  have  believed."  "  Let  our  seeking,  there- 
fore, be  in  that  which  is  our  own,  and  from  those 
who  are  our  own,  and  concerning  that  which  is  our 
own,  that,  and  only  that,  which  can  become  an  ob- 
ject of  enquiry  without  impairing  the  rule  of  faith." 
Saving  the  one  central  "  faith,"  the  field  of  enquiry 
is  free  on  every  side.  Tertullian  and  Irenseus  both 
maintain  that  liberty.  Only  the  enquirer  must  re- 
member always  that  our  Lord  said,  Thy  faith  hath 
saved  thee,  not  skill  in  interpreting  the  Scriptures. 
"  Faith  is  fixed  in  a  rule.  It  has  a  law,  and  in  the 
observance  thereof  salvation." 

The  argument  deserves  consideration.  Our  per- 
ceptions are  blunted  to  it,  in  these  days,  because  we 
are  accustomed  to  see  Churches  put  mere  matters  of 
opinion  into  "  Creeds  "  and  make  them  conditions  of 
fellowship.  Again,  we  look  back  to  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  we  see  that  at  that  time  agreement  with 
the  Churches  would  have  required  a  man  to  accept 
what  we  consider  corruptions  of  primitive  Christian- 
ity. But  Tertullian's  rule,  if  it  had  been  followed, 
would  have  prevented  creeds  of  the  modern  order 
from  being  manufactured  at  all.  It  expressly  for- 
bade a  Creed  that  was  not  of  divine  origin  in  its 
substance.  And  as  to  Mediaeval  corruptions,  Ter- 
tullian did  not  ask  men  to  agree  with  the  Churches 
in  all  their  ideas,  nor  even  in  all  their  interpretations 


TertulMan's  Statement  of  the  Rule  of  Faith.     291 

of  Scripture,  but  only  in  their  tradition  as  to  what 
had  been  declared  to  be  necessary  truths  by  the  In- 
fallible Revealer,  Jesus  Christ.  There  are  three  his- 
torical possibilities  about  the  first  Christian  Creed- 
making,  (a)  Oar  Lord  told  His  followers  what  ele- 
ments of  truth  to  make  a  Creed  of,  and  they  pre- 
served those  elements  in  a  faithful  tradition,  (b) 
Our  Lord  gave  the  elements  which  He  considered 
essential,  but  His  followers  did  not  preserve  them 
accurately,  (c)  Our  Lord  never  gave  men  any 
such  distinctive  instruction  as  to  truths  which  were 
to  be  held  as  an  essential  Creed,  but  His  followers 
here  and  there  began  after  a  time  to  make  such 
Creeds  for  themselves.  Tertullian  makes  the  claim, 
and  it  would  seem  to  be  a  fair  one,  that  the  first  of 
these  suppositions  is  the  only  one  which  is  consistent 
with  such  a  fact  as  he  actually  had  before  him, — the 
fact  that  all  Christian  Churches  professed  to  have  a 
faith  authoritative  and  certain,  and  that  they  all 
agreed  as  to  what  that  faith  was.  It  is  worth  while 
to  compare  Tertullian's  statement  of  the  rule  of 
faith  (Prescription,  xiii.)  with  that  which  we  have 
quoted  from  Irenaeus  (p.  262). 

"  Now  with  regard  to  this  rule  of  faith, — that  we 
may  from  this  point  know  what  it  is  which  we  are 
to  defend, — it  is,  you  must  know,  that  which  pre- 
scribes the  belief  that  there  is  one  only  God,  and 
that  He  is  none  other  than  the  Creator  of  the  world, 
who  produced  all  things  out  of  nothing  through  His 
own  Word,  first  of  all  sent  forth  ;  that  this  Word  is 
called  His  Son,  and  under  the  name  of  God  was  seen 
in  diverse  manners  by  the  patriarchs,  heard  at  all 


292  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

times  in  the  prophets,  at  last  brought  down  by  the 
Spirit  and  Power  of  the  Father  into  the  Virgin  Mary, 
was  made  flesh  in  her  womb,  and  being  born  of  her, 
went  forth  as  Jesus  Christ;  thenceforth  He  preached 
the  new  law  and  the  new  promise  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven  and  worked  miracles;  having  been  crucified, 
He  rose  again  the  third  day ;  then,  having  been 
caught  away  into  the  heavens,  He  sat  at  the  right 
hand  of  the  Father ;  sent  in  His  place  the  Power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  to  lead  such  as  believe ;  will  come 
with  glory  to  take  the  saints  to  the  enjoyment 
of  everlasting  life  and  of  the  heavenly  promises,  and 
to  condemn  the  wicked  to  everlasting  fire,  after  the 
resurrection  of  both  these  classes  shall  have  hap- 
pened, together  with  the  restoration  of  their  flesh. 
This  rule,  as  it  will  be  proved,  was  taught  by  Christ, 
and  raises  amongst  ourselves  no  other  questions 
than  those  which  heresies  introduce,  and  which  make 
men  heretics." 

3.  In  approaching  Tertullian's  practical  writings* 
we  are  met  by  the  problem  of  his  Montanism.  How 
could  one  who  held  that  the  Catholic  Church  was  a 
messenger  from  Jesus,  teaching  infallibly  a  certain 
faith,  fall  away  into  a  rival  movement?  The  answer  to 
the  difficult}'  is  that  Montanism  presented  itself  to  men 
not  as  a  rival  of  the  Catholic  Church,  but  as  its  natural 
continuation.  Montanism  held  every  portion  of  the 
Catholic  Faith.  Its  heresy,  if  heresy  it  may  be 
called,  consisted,  as  with  modern  Romanism,  and  a 
great  deal  of  modern  Protestantism,  in  adding  to  the 
original  faith  of  the  Church  some  further  elements 
held  now  to  be  necessary  for  men  to  believe.     Ter- 


TertulUan  not  Definitely  Separated  from  the  Church.  293 

tullian  had  what  seemed  to  him  irresistible  proof  that 
certain  statements  were  a  heavenly  revelation. 
Montanism  came  and  said,  "  Here  is  an  additional 
revelation."  The  proof  of  the  alleged  new  revela- 
tions seems  to  us  very  insufficient,  but  on  this  side 
Ter tullian  was  weak,  and  on  this  side  he  fell. 

The  amount  of  his  fall  has  been  greatly  exagger- 
ated. Generally  speaking,  people  who  accepted  the 
new  prophesyings  as  from  God,  could  not  go  on  in- 
definitely in  one  communion  and  fellowship  with 
people  who  thought  them  a  delusion  ;  but  there  is  no 
proof  that  such  a  separation  came  in  Tertullian's  life- 
time. If  he  had  been  excommunicated  at  Carthage 
during  the  time  of  his  literary  activity,  we  should 
have  heard  of  it.  He  would  have  foamed  at  the 
mouth,  if  those  whom  he  called  "  Psychics "  had 
dared  so  to  insult  the  "Spirituals."  Again,  he 
never  allowed  his  followers  to  excommunicate  the 
Psychics.  "We  withdrew  from  the  Psychics,"  he  cer- 
tainly says  in  the  Praxeas  (i.),  but  the  phrase  seems  to 
mean  no  more  than  "I  left  the  High  Churchmen,"  or 
"I  parted  company  with  the  Evangelicals."  For 
even  his  bitter  tract  De  Monogamia  ("On  Single 
Marriage ")  contains  a  striking  acknowledgment 
that  the  Psychics  are  part  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
He  contrasts  Gnostics,  forbidding  all  marriage,  and 
ordinary  Christians,  allowing  second  marriages,  and 
he  does  it  in  these  words :  "  Heretics  do  away  mar- 
riages ;  Psychics  accumulate  them."  "The  former 
marry  not  even  once,"  he  goes  on  ;  "  the  latter,  not 
only  once.  What  dost  thou,  Law  of  the  Creator  ? 
Between  alien  eunuchs  and  thine  own  grooms,  thou 


294  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

complainest  as  much  of  the  over-obedience  of  thine 
own  household,  as  of  the  contempt  of  strangers." 
"  Psychics  "  is  a  very  hard  word,  much  harder  than 
"Puseyites,"  "Methodists,"  "  Ritualists,"  or  "Ra- 
tionalists." But  hard  words  break  no  bones.  Ter- 
tullian  distinctly  recognizes  non-Montanist  Christians 
as  belonging  to  the  "  household  "  of  the  divine  law, 
and  as  being  no  "heretics."  And  yet,  while  not 
separated  from  the  communion  of  the  Church,  Ter- 
tullian  did  fall.  From  the  noble  sweetness  of  his 
Address  to  the  Martyrs  to  the  ugly  bitterness  of  his 
most  immodest  treatise,  On  Modesty,  is  a  deep  descent. 
In  his  Montanism  there  was  more  than  an  intellectual 
mistake.     There  was  a  moral  failure. 

It  was  really  TertulliaiTs  impatience  that  betrayed 
him.  In  times  of  religious  revival,  or  when  men  are 
praying  and  longing  for  a  revival  of  religion,- — and 
that  is  itself  revival, — schemes  of  new  organization, 
new  machinery,  new  discipline,  something  that  one 
has  not  seen  tried  before,  will  always  have  a  great 
attraction  for  ardent  minds.  Montanism  offered  a 
new  discipline,  a  prospect  of  new  revelations, — 
heaven  opened  every  Sunday,  one  might  say, — and 
the  remedy  for  careless  living  most  dear  to  the 
Puritan  conscience  in  every  age,  that  of  making  the 
yoke  of  Christ  harder  than  it  had  seemed  to  men 
before,  so  hard,  indeed,  that  no  one  would  even  try 
to  wear  it,  who  had  not  the  spirit  of  supreme  self- 
surrender.  The  scheme  has  never  worked  well.  It 
does  not  keep  out  hypocrisy.  It  does  not  exclude 
selfishness.  It  has  never  in  all  history  made  a 
separatist,  Puritan  Church  holier,  either  in  the  num- 


Tertullian  Witnessing  to  Christian  Usages.    295 

ber  of  its  saints,  or  in  the  height  of  attainment  of  its 
very  best  people,  than  the  Catholic  Church  of  the 
same  time  and  country.1  But  at  least  Tertullian  had 
not  seen  the  experiment  tried. 

Some  of  the  practical  treatises  show  but  little  of 
the  radical  and  Puritan  temper.  Such  are  those  on 
Prayer,  on  Patience,  and  on  Baptism,  though  this 
last,  allowing  baptism  by  a  layman  in  case  of  neces- 
sity, refuses  to  recognize  the  possibility  of  Christ's 
baptism  being  administered  by  a  woman.  Most  of 
the  practical  works  deal  with  subjects  which  were 
troubling  the  radical  party  at  Carthage,  and  these 
may  be  ranged  under  five  heads:  persecution,  res- 
toration of  penitents,  women's  dress,  fasting,  liberty 
of  marriage. 

(I)  Concerning  the  first  of  these,  Tertullian  has 
two  tractates,  On  Flight  in  Persecution  and  On  the 
Chaplet.  The  former  makes  reasonable  objection  to 
the  practice  of  Christians  who  bribed  the  authorities 
to  let  them  go.  The  latter,  occupied  with  a  case  of 
folly  where  a  soldier  refused  to  wear  a  laurel-crown 
in  honor  of  a  victory,  would  not  be  worth  noticing 
but  for  a  remarkable  enumeration  of  Christian  usages 
in  chapter  iii.  ki  Holy  Scripture  forbids  no  man  to 
wear  a  crown  of  laurel,"  pleaded  some  sensible  Chris- 
tians. "  We  have  no  such  custom,"  is  Tertullian's 
reply,  and  he  goes  on  to  show  how  much  is  settled 
for  Christians  by  usage  with  no  Scripture  to  back 
it    up.     "I    shall    begin,"  he    says,   "with  baptism. 

1  Thus  one  may  compare  Richard  Hooker,  aud  Bishop  Lancelot 
Andrews,  and  (Jeorge  Herbert,  and  Nicholas  Ferrar,  of  the 
Church  of  England  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries, 
with  the  Puritan  congregations  at  Leydeu  aud  Amsterdam. 


296  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

When  we  are  going  to  enter  the  water,  and  a  little 
before,  in  the  Church  and  under  the  hand  of  the 
chief  minister,  we  solemnly  profess  that  we  disown 
the  devil  and  his  pomp  and  his  angels.  Hereupon 
we  are  thrice  immersed,  making  a  somewhat  ampler 
pledge  than  the  Lord  appointed  in  the  Gospel.  Then 
when  we  have  been  acknowledged  as  children  of  the 
Church,1  we  taste  first  of  all  a  mixture  of  milk  and 
honey,  and  from  that  day  Ave  refrain  from  the  daily 
bath  for  a  whole  week.  We  take  also  in  assemblies 
before  daybreak  and  from  the  hand  of  none  but  the 
chief  ministers  the  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  which 
the  Lord  delivered  to  the  whole  Church,  and  at  a  meal- 
time. We  make  offerings  for  the  dead,  as  birthday 
honors,  as  often  as  their  anniversary  comes  round. 
On  the  Lord's  Day  we  count  fasting  or  kneeling  in 
prayer  unlawful.  From  Easter  to  Whitsunday  also 
we  rejoice  in  the  same  privilege.  We  feel  pained  if 
aught  of  our  wine,  or  even  of  our  bread,  be  spilled 
on  the  ground.  At  every  forward  step  and  move- 
ment, at  every  going  in  or  out,  when  we  put  on  our 
clothes  and  shoes,  when  we  bathe,  when  we  take  our 
places  at  the  table,  when  we  light  the  lamps,  when 
we  lie  down,  when  we  seat  ourselves,  whatever  em- 
ployment occupieth  us,  we  sign  our  foreheads  with, 
the  sign." 

The  "  sign  "  just  referred  to  is  that  of  the  cross. 
The  "  ampler  pledge "  at  baptisms  is  the  current 
form    of   Creed    as    distinguished   from    the    simple 

1  Literally,  "when  we  have  been  taken  up,"  with  reference  to 
a  Roman  custom,  whereby  a  father  took  up  a  newborn  son  in  his 
arms  to  acknowledge  him  formally  as  his  own. 


Tertullian  on  Treatment  of  Post- Baptismal  Sin.  297 

formula,  "I  believe  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Son, 
and  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  refraining  from  the 
daily  bath  was  evidently  suggested  by  St.  John  xiii. 
10.  The  custom  of  standing  in  prayer  on  Sundays 
and  through  the  seven  weeks  of  the  Paschal  season 
was  sanctioned  by  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  A.  D.  325, 
and  is  mentioned  (at  least  the  Sunday  use)  by  Ra- 
banus  Maurus,  Archbishop  of  Mainz,  in  the  middle 
of  the  ninth  century.  Tertullian  is  the  first  writer 
who  mentions  the  Church's  habit  of  praying  for  the 
Christian  dead,  but  he  speaks  of  it  in  several  treatises, 
and  always  as  of  a  natural  and  universal  practice. 
There  is  no  hint  in  the  writers  of  our  period  that  the 
prayers  were  to  deliver  souls  from  pain.  They  are 
always  referred  to  rather  as  being  at  rest.  Bat  nobody 
dreamed  that  Christian  souls  departed  could  be  be- 
yond the  need  of  God's  blessing,  nor  yet  that  there 
could  be  any  harm  in  asking  Him  to  give  it,  so  that 
His  loving  gift  might  be  the  Church's  gift  too. 

(2)  As  regards  the  treatment  of  penitents  the 
judgments  of  the  Post-Apostolic  Church  were  apt 
to  be  very  severe.  If  there  is  one  thing  that  our 
age  lacks  especially,  it  is  an  awful  sense  of  the  sinful- 
ness of  sin.  That  sense  the  early  Church  had,  and 
under  the  burden  of  it  the  Church  could  not  make 
light  of  grave  sins  committed  by  any  who  had  once 
been  made  members  of  Christ.  One  who  had  be- 
come a  murderer,  an  adulterer,  an  apostate,  could 
not  readily  be  restored  to  communion,  "  though  he 
sought  it  carefully,  with  tears."  A  public  penance 
lasting  for  a  term  of  years  was  the  least  bar  that  the 
Church  would  put  in  the  way  of  such  an  offender. 


298  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

Hernias  had  spoken  of  the  case  of  adultery,  as  one 
for  which  there  was  to  be  pardon  on  repentance, 
"but  not  frequently.  For  there  is  but  one  repent- 
ance for  the  servants -of  God  "  (Mandate  iv.)  If  a 
Christian  fell  twice  into  great  and  open  sin,  he  must 
go  unabsolved  to  his  death.  Does  this  sound  stern  ? 
It  was  too  lax  for  the  stricter  judges  of  the  second 
century.  They  read  such  places  as  Heb.  vi.  4-8, 
x.  26-29,  so  misunderstandingly  as  to  forget  the  ex- 
ample of  St.  Paul's  dealing  with  the  incestuous  Co- 
rinthian (1  Cor.  v.,  2  Cor.  ii.),  and  insisted  that  no 
grave  sin  after  baptism  could  be  put  away  in  this 
world  at  all.  Tertullian,  who  in  his  book  On  Re- 
pentance had  taken  the  view  of  "  one  restoration," 
and  had  spoken  of  Hennas  with  respect,  came  to  be 
a  most  bitter  partisan  of  the  harsher  view,  and  in  his 
book  On  Modesty  spoke  sneeringly  of  that  "  Shep- 
herd of  adulterers." 

(3)  The  subject  of  women's  dress  has  engaged 
the  attention  of  reformers  in  all  ages,  from  Isaiah  to 
John  Knox,  and  later.  Tertullian  could  not  with- 
hold his  fluent  pen  from  such  a  theme.  On  Women's 
Dress  is  a  book  much  like  other  books.  On  the  Veil- 
ing of  Virgins  does  more  to  illustrate  the  times.  It 
was  Carthaginian  custom  for  married  women  to  have 
their  heads  veiled  in  public  places,  and  for  unmarried 
women  to  be  distinguished  by  the  absence  of  the 
veil.  There  was  an  awkwardness  for  umarried 
women  in  dressing  in  a  way  that  was  generally  re- 
garded as  belonging  exclusively  to  married  women. 
But  then  there  was  St.  Paul's  direction  that  women 
should  wear  their  heads  covered  in  Church.     Con- 


Fasting  in  the  Post- Apostolic  Church.  299 

servatives  maintained,  somewhat  audaciously,  that 
St.  Paul  meant  only  "  wives."  The  radicals  were 
angered  by  such  a  plea,  and  they  found,  apparently, 
a  third  party  still  more  provoking,  whose,  unmarried 
women  did  wear  veils  abroad  for  protection  against 
heathen  license,  but  carefully  removed  them  in 
Church,  in  their  old  wa}^.  "  Nothing  to  excite  bitter- 
ness here,"  says  the  modern  reader.  But  no  !  Mat- 
ters of  form  are  always  matters  of  feeling  somewhat 
particularly.  Men  did  grow  very  bitter,  and  with 
Tertullian  almost  every  argument  is  an  insult.  Here 
occurs,  however,  one  of  his  fine  sayings:  "Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  surnamed  Himself  Truth,  not  Usage." 

(4)  In  the  matter  of  fasting,  as  in  the  treatment 
of  penitents,  we  have  a  measure  of  the  distance  that 
separates  us  from  the  ante-Nicene  Church.  "I  have 
a  station,"  says  Hermas  (Similitude  v.),  and  when 
the  Shepherd  asks  him  what  that  is,1  "  I  am  fasting,"  is 
his  reply.  Statio  was  the  Latin  for  sentry-duty,  and 
the  Church's  idea  of  "standing  sentry  "  was  to  give 
a  day  to  fasting,  with  special  prayers,  from  early 
morning  till  3  P.  M.  The  Church  had  two  such  days 
in  every  week, — Wednesday,  marked  by  our  Lord's 
betrayal,  and  Friday,  the  day  of  His  death.  Again, 
no  Christian  ever  thought  of  receiving  the  Lord's 
Body  and  Blood  in  the  Eucharist  otherwise  than 
fasting.  Then  there  was  the  great  annual  fast  of 
the  Friday  and  Saturday  before  Easter,  the  days  in 
which  the  Bridegroom  was  taken  away,  a  fast  which 
some  Christians  carried  out  for  forty  hours,  without 

1  Evidently  the  word  was  very  new  even  to  Hernias,  or  he 
would  not  have  lugged  in  an  explanation  of  it  in  this  way. 


300  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

relief,  day  and  night.  Occasionally  also  the  bishop 
of  a  diocese  appointed  a  fast-day,  and  "fast-day" 
then  meant  a  whole  day  of  going  absolutely  without 
food.  To  eat  nothing  till  3  P.  M.,  was  only  a  semi- 
jejunium,  a  half-fast.  That  would  do  for  the  "sta- 
tionary days,"  week  by  week,  but  a  real  fast-day  was 
something  more.  Finally,  some  very  devoted  per- 
sons added  to  their  fasts  a  "  xerophagy,"  a  dry-food 
diet,  which  meant  that  when  they  did  come  to  eat 
anything,  they  would  still  swallow  no  water,  no 
milk,  no  broth,  no!  not  even  fruit-juice,  to  moisten 
their  dry  lips.  Such  was  the  fasting  of  second  cen- 
tury Christians.  They  could  not  have  understood 
in  the  very  least  a  religion  which  professed  to  follow 
the  example  or  the  precept  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  ex- 
cused people  wholly  from  the  discipline  of  fasting. 

The  reforming  party  were  by  no  means  satisfied 
with  what  seems  to  us  such  severity.  They  clamored 
for  "stations  "  protracted  to  the  vesper  hour,  full- 
fasts  instead  of  half-fasts,  on  Wednesday  and  Friday. 
They  claimed  to  have  had  revelations  demanding 
this  extension  of  the  rule  of  fasting,  and  also  a 
"  xerophagy  "  of  two  weeks  in  every  year,  the  Lord's 
Day,  of  course,  excluded.  No  Christian  would  think 
of  fasting  on  that  day  of  joy.  But  not  only  did 
those  who  called  themselves  "spirituals"  demand 
this  harder  discipline.  They  raged  horribly  against 
all  who  would  not  fall  in  with  it.  Christians  who 
fasted  till  mid-afternoon  twice  a  week  are  said  to  be 
"bursting  with  glutton}^ ;  "  compared  with  the  Chil- 
dren of  Israel,  who  "preferred  the  fragrance  of  gar- 
lic   and   onion   to  that  of  heaven  ; "  contrasted  with 


Low  Idea  of  Marriage  in  Early  Centuries.     301 


the  "spiritual  "  man,  "  whose  heart  is  rather  lifted  up 
than  fattened  up ; "  warned  that  lust  is  close  akin  to 
gluttony  such  as  theirs.  Surely,  never  was  self-denial 
more  lacking  in  self-restraint.  And  yet — reformers 
in  all  ages  have  been  just  like  that,  as  severe  in  ab- 
stinence, as  lax  in  uncharity  and  abuse  of  brethren. 

(5)  One  point  more,  which  is  that  of  the  Christian 
man's  liberty  in  the  matter  of  marriage.  Again  it  is 
hard  for  us  to  understand  the  Christian  mind  at  the 
close  of  the  second  century.  We  must  make  an 
effort  to  think  back.  In  a  corrupt  society  all  good 
things  are  corrupted,  and  the  heathen  society  of 
those  days  was  awfully  corrupt.  Noble  ideals  were 
rotted  away,  and  what  ought  to  have  been  the  noble 
institution  of  marriage  had  become  in  fact  an  ignoble 
commerce.  It  has  taken  ages  for  the  Gospel  to  re- 
store those  holy  relations  of  man  and  wife  to  God's 
ideal.  Nay,  we  have  not  reached  that  splendid 
height  even  yet.  But  when  Tertullian  was  alive, 
even  the  Christian  idea  of  marriage  was  pitifully 
low.  There  were  Christians  that  thought  of  it  as 
some  men  now  think  of  profane  language,  as  an  in- 
dulgence low  and  lowering  in  itself,  but  which  must 
be  conceded  in  practice  as  a  safety-valve  to  the  un- 
governed  feeling  of  the  average  man.  It  is  a  sad 
thing  to  have  to  confess,  and  it  is  a  measure  of  the 
social  degradation  out  of  which  Christ  had  to  raise 
His  early  followers,  but  it  is  a  simple  fact.  Hence 
come  the  many  canons  of  Church  Councils  forbid- 
ding to  the  clergy  marriage  after  ordination,  or  pro- 
hibiting the  ordination  of  any  man  who  had  been 
married  more  than  once,  or  in  later  times  prohibit- 


302  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

ing  the  clergy  from  living  in  the  relation  of  honorable 
marriage  at  all.1  Among  a  people  in  such  a  condi- 
tion of  mind  a  radical  party  would  naturally  try  to 
limit  freedom  of  marriage.  Even  comparatively 
early  in  Tertullian's  career  as  a  writer  he  addresses 
a  treatise  in  two  books  To  His  Wife  (Ad  Uxorem),  in 
which  he  urges  a  modest  widowhood  as  at  least  far 
superior  to  second  marriage  for  women.  After  he 
came  thoroughly  under  the  influence  of  the  "new 
prophesyings "  he  went  on  to  insist  that  both  for 
women  and  for  men  second  marriages  were  positively 
sinful  and  a  deep  disgrace.  Three  books  present 
Tertullian's  later  views  in  an  ascending  scale  of  pas- 
sion, On  the  Exhortation  to  Chastity,  On  Single  Mar- 
riage, (Be  Monogamia),  and  On  Modesty  (Be  Pudicitia). 
Even  in  the  first  of  these  the  very  title  is  an  offence 
to  right  feeling,  as  if  a  second  marriage  was  a  breach 
of  the  law  of  chastity,  but  Tertullian  does  not 
scruple  to  tell  us  (in  chapter  ix.)  that  so  is  any  mar- 
riage at  all.  The  later  books  grow  worse  and  worse, 
but  even  the  mildest  of  the  three  (the  work,  be  it  re- 
membered, of  an  exceptionally  devoted  Christian)  is 
not  fit  for  a  modern  Christian  to  read.  The  Be  Ex- 
hortatione  contains  one  much  quoted  passage  where 
Tertullian,  arguing  from  the  prohibition  of  clerical 
second  marriages,  presses  upon  his  hearers  that  they 
are  all  priests.  "  It  is  the  authority  of  the  Church 
.     .     .  which    has    established    the    difference    be- 

1  The  prohibition  of  a  second  marriage  to  a  presbyter  by  St.  Paul 
(1  Tim.  iii.  2)  would  seem  to  rest  on  quite  another  ground, — the 
office  of  the  Christian  priest  as  a  type  of  the  invisible  Christ,  who 
is  the  Head  of  one  undivided  Body,  the  heavenly  Bridegroom 
with  but  one  possible  Bride. 


May  a  Lay  Priesthood  Offer  Alone  ?  303 

tween  the  Order  [the  clergy]  and  the  laity.  Ac- 
cordingly, where  there  is  no  joint  session  of  the  ec- 
clesiastical Order,  you  offer,  and  baptize,  and  are 
priest,  alone  for  yourself.  For  where  there  are  three, 
there  is  a  Church,  though  they  be  laymen."  This  is 
quoted  as  if  it  were  common  Church  doctrine  of  those 
days.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  pure  Montanism.  Ter- 
tullian  himself  had  in  his  book  On  Baptism  (vi.) 
made  out  that  the  "three"  on  whose  presence  a 
Church  depended  were  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost.  That  three  "spiritual"  laymen  were  a 
Church  sufficient  to  celebrate  the  Eucharist  is  a  doc- 
trine for  which  no  other  great  name  can  be  alleged 
in  the  Church's  first  three  centuries  of  life.  It  is 
claimed  by  some  modern  writers  that  Montanism  is 
the  true  representative  of  the  Apostolic  Church. 
"  That  which  called  itself  the  Catholic  Church  is  the 
new  growth,"  they  say,  "  and  Montanism  represents 
the  last  struggle  of  an  expiring  spirituality."  It  is 
a  false  spirituality  which  takes  hold  of  such  a  man 
as  Tertullian,  so  gifted  and  really  so  conscientious, 
and  makes  him  run  riot  in  pride  and  ugliness  and 
moral  coarseness. 

III.  Hijipolytus.  Among  the  treasures  of  the 
Vatican  is  a  statue  with  a  curious  history.  It 
represents  a  dignified  ecclesiastic  sitting  in  a  mar- 
ble chair,  on  the  back  and  sides  of  which  are  carved 
a  list  of  books,  evidently  the  works  of  the  seated 
figure,  and  a  table  for  finding  Easter  for  seven  six- 
teen-year periods  from  A.  D.  222  to  333.  The 
"noble  features  and  high,  commanding  brow  "  will 
not  be  dwelt  on   here,  for  they  are  the  work  of  a 


304  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

modern  sculptor.  The  statue  was  found  headless  in 
some  rubbish  in  1551.  But  the  chair  is  the  great 
tiling.  The  list  of  works  shows  that  we  have  here  a 
monument,  set  up  by  contemporary  friends  in  honor 
of  Hippolytus,  a  great  teacher  of  the  Roman  Church, 
who  was  banished  in  235,  and  died  within  three 
years  after.  By  contemporary  friends,  we  say,  for 
the  table  for  finding  the  da}rs  of  Paschal  full  moons 
was  sadly  faulty.  Even  in  the  year  236  its  full 
moon  was  four  days  out  of  the  way.  A  few  years 
more,  and  its  faults  must  have  become  so  glaring 
that  friends  would  rather  have  kept  it  back.  It  is 
even  possible  that  the  statue  was  set  up  in  the  life- 
time of  the  writer  so  much  admired.  But  that  is  not 
the  probable  reason  why  one  of  his  chief  works  is 
not  named  on  the  chair  at  all. 

That  work  which  finds  no  mention  on  the  chair 
came  near  disappearing  out  of  Christian  history  al- 
together. The  first  of  its  ten  books,  indeed,  was 
known  to  scholars,  but  by  none  ascribed  to  the  true 
author,  till  in  1842  a  manuscript  was  found  in  a 
Greek  monastery  library,  which  contained  the  last 
seven  books  of  the  Philosophoumcna  or  Refutation 
of  All  Heresies,  and  threw  a  flood  of  rather  lurid 
light  upon  the  history  of  Christian  Rome  in  the 
first  quarter  of  the  third  century.  The  writer 
alludes  to  other  works  of  his  in  a  way  which 
shows  him  to  be  no  other  than  Hippolytus.  He 
speaks  of  himself  as  a  bishop.  He  lives  in  Rome. 
He  is  bitterly  opposed  to  two  successive  Roman 
bishops,  Zephyrinus  (198-217)  and  Callistus  (217- 
222).     He  speaks  of  Zephyrinus  as  tliinkiwj  that  he 


Hippolytus  Probably  a  Bishop- Coadjutor.      305 

governs  the  Church,  of  Callistus  as  setting  up  a  heret- 
ical school  and  receiving  into  his  fellowship  persons 
whom  Hippolytus  and  his  associates  had  visited 
with  excommunication.  So  far  the  ninth  book  of 
the  Philosophoumena. 

Was  Hippolytus,  then  the  first  example  of  an 
anti-pope  ?  Some  have  thought  so,  but  in  that  case 
all  the  great  sees  would  have  been  notified  of  his 
schism,  and  the  story  would  be  well  known.  Euse- 
bius  knew  of  him  as  a  voluminous  writer  and  emi- 
nent bishop,  but  could  not  tell  of  what  Church. 
Jerome  was  in  the  same  difficulty.  A  faint  and  late 
tradition  connects  his  name  with  Portus,  the  harbor- 
town  through  which  Rome's  foreign  commerce  mostly 
went  to  sea.  Bishop  Lightfoot  seems  to  have  found 
the  one  explanation  which  fits  all  the  facts.  Our 
Hippolytus  was  a  leading  presbyter  of  the  Roman 
Church,  and  was  made  a  sort  of  bishop-coadjutor  to 
the  bishop  of  Rome,  in  the  days  of  the  imperious 
Victor,  in  order  to  provide  for  the  spiritual  wants 
of  foreigners  living  at  Rome,  or  visiting  Rome,  and 
unable  or  unwilling  to  use  the  Latin  speech.  There 
is  reason  to  believe  that  Hippolytus  lived  at  Rome, 
and  that  the  underground  cemetery  where  he  was 
buried  was  on  his  own  property,  but  that  he  was 
called  "  bishop  of  the  nationalities,"  or  some  such 
title,  and  that  he  really  had  a  great  d^d  to  do  with 
Portus,  which  was  a  natural  headquarters  for  for- 
eigners having  business  with  the  imperial  city,  for 
sailors,  merchants,  bankers,  interpreters,  couriers, 
and  the  whole  line  of  foreign  travel.  We  seem  to 
have  reached  a  time  of  transition.  Victor,  with  his 
T 


306  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

thoroughly  Latin  name,  is  not  a  representative  of 
that  Greek-speaking  population  with  which  the 
Church  in  Rome  began.  He  represents  not  only 
a  Latin  membership  coming  up  at  last,  but  one 
strong  enough  to  elect  a  bishop  from  its  own  ranks. 
The  foreign  element,  the  element  that  would  have 
preferred  a  bishop  from  a  Greek  family,  must  still 
have  been  very  strong.  It  was  both  wise  and  kind 
to  take  the  chief  presbyter  of  that  section  of  the 
Church,  and  make  him  a  sort  of  suffragan -bishop, 
with  an  especial  oversight  of  all  the  foreign  elements 
in  the  motley  population  of  Rome. 

There  were  dangers  also  in  the  scheme.  The 
party  to  which  it  has  been  conceded  that  they  shall 
have  a  bishop-suffragan  chosen  from  their  ranks 
happen  to  have  for  their  leading  man  the  one  emi- 
nent scholar  and  writer  of  the  Roman  Church. 
When  Victor  dies,  who  with  all  his  faults  seems 
to  have  been  a  good  deal  of  a  man,  the  newly 
dominant  Latin  party  have  not  a  really  strong 
man  to  put  in  his  place.  But  they  have  a  man 
who  represents  their  general  feeling  well  enough, 
so  they  choose  Zephyrinus,  and  he  is  made  four- 
teenth bishop  of  Rome.  Behold,  then,  our  bishop 
of  the  foreigners  busying  himself  with  abun- 
dant writing  on  subjects  widely  diverse, — chro- 
nology (in  which  his  blunders  were  fearful,  but  no- 
body in  the  Roman  Church  knew  enough  to  correct 
him),  history,  interpretation  of  many  portions  of 
Holy  Scripture, l  and  theology,  but  all  the  time  in- 

1  A  recently  discovered  portion  of  his  Commentary  on  Daniel  in- 
cludes the  interesting  statement  that  our  Lord's  birth  took  place 
on  Wednesday,   December  25th,  in  the  forty -second  year  of  Au- 


The  Quarrel  about  Doctrine  in  the  Roman  Church.  307 

tolerably  fretted  by  these  two  conditions, — that  he 
was  the  leader  of  a  party  lately  thrust  from  power, 
and  that  lie  must  have  for  an  official  superior  a  man 
in  every  other  view  inferior  to  him.  The  scene  be- 
ing thus  prepared,  two  occasions  of  quarrel  arose, 
where  certainly  one  would  have  been  enough.  The 
two  parties  contended  about  doctrine  and  about  dis- 
cipline, and  in  both  cases  the  quarrel  went  to  ex- 
tremes. 

1.  The  quarrel  about  doctrine  concerned  the  sub- 
ject of  Monarchianism  (p.  251).  Hippolytus  declares 
that  both  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus  were  Patripas- 
sians  of  the  school  of  Noetus,  and  that  it  was  Cal- 
listus himself  who  perverted  the  presbyter  Sabellius 
to  the  acceptance  of  this  heresy.  Callistus,  accord- 
ing to  his  bitter  rival,  was  a  stronger  man  than  Zeph- 
yrinus, and  having  persuaded  Zephyrinus  to  make 
him  archdeacon  of  Rome,  used  his  position  to  urge 
the  bishop  on  to  heretical  utterances,  which  would  stir 
up  strife.  Then  both  bishop  and  archdeacon  would 
soothe  the  orthodox  with  fair  professions  of  entire 
agreement.  They  would  even  put  forth  statements 
which  ought  to  clear  anybody  from  the  charge  of 
Patripassianism, — "  I  know  that  there  is  one  God, 
Jesus  Christ,  nor  except  Him  any  other  that  is  be- 
gotten and  amenable  to  suffering,"  and  on  another 
occasion,  "The  Father  did  not  die,  but  the  Son." 
Hippolytus  regarded  these  utterances  as  simply 
fraudulent.     He  knew  what  these  people  really  be- 

gustus.  Perhaps  Hippolytus  was  all  wrong  about  it,  but  at  least 
this  find  carries  the  tradition  that  the  day  was  December  25th, 
buck  nearly  two  centuries  from  what  had  been  for  long  its  earliest 
known  appearance. 


308  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

lieved  in  their  hearts,  and  he  went  right  on  exposing 
them. 

But  naturally  the  outcry  was  not  all  on  one  side. 
In  his  fury  Hippolytus  lets  out  the  fact  that  Callis- 
tus  called  him  and  his  following  "  ditheists,"  "  wor- 
shippers of  two  Gods,"  retorting  the  charge  of  heresy 
with  a  vengeance.  "  And  he  (Callistus)  hurried 
headlong  into  folly  from  the  fact  that  all  consented 
to  his  hypocrisy, — we  did  not,  however, — and  called 
us  worshippers  of  two  Gods,  discharging  with  vio- 
lence the  venom  that  was  in  him."  Plainly  the 
majority  of  thoughtful  Christians  at  Rome  were  sat- 
isfied of  the  orthodoxy  of  their  bishop  and  arch- 
deacon. "  All  consented  "  cannot  mean  less  than 
that.  The  recognition  of  Praxeas,  not  even  men- 
tioned here,  was  probably  a  mistake  in  the  case  of  a 
man  who  made  no  long  stay  at  Rome.  The  excom- 
munication of  Sabellius  by  Callistus,  when  he  became 
bishop,  may  charitably  be  supposed  to  be  a  perfectly 
honest  act.  There  is  no  reason  for  believing  the 
dreadful  charge  that  when  these  men  said  orthodox 
things,  the}'  simply  lied.  It  is  a  sad  quarrel,  but  the 
probability  is  that  Hippolytus  was  no  ditheist,  and 
his  opponents  no  Sabellians.  When  men  are  using 
words  to  express  new  ideas,  they  need  to  take  time 
and  use  care,  before  they  can  understand  one  an- 
other. Words  have  not  quite  an  absolute  meaning. 
That  great  word  "  homo-ousios  "  was  once  condemned 
as  heretical,  and  very  properly,  because  at  that  time 
it  was  used  to  carry  a  heretical  idea.  Almost  any 
man  can  be  proved  to  be  a  heretic,  if  you  take  his 
words  and  declare  that  they  mean  thus  and  so,  and 


The  Quarrel  about  Discipline  in  the  Roman  Church.  309 

disregard  his  indignant  assurances  that  he  never 
meant  anything  of  the  kind.  (  And  very  especially  if 
the  parties  to  a  theological  controversy  do  not  by 
preference  use  the  same  language  as  their  vehicle  of 
expression,  but  one  Greek,  we  will  say,  and  the  other 
Latin,  the  opportunity  for  honest  misunderstanding 
is  increased.  There  was  probably  more  bad  blood 
than  bad  theology  in  this  affair.  It  is  notable,  how- 
ever, that  neither  party  appealed  to  the  rest  of  the 
Church.  Can  it  be  that  neither  party  thought  that 
it  could  really  make  out  a  case  against  the  other  be- 
fore a  disinterested  tribunal  ?  If  half  that  Hippoly- 
tus  says  was  true,  he  ought  to  have  called  all  the 
great  Churches  to  his  help,  and  it  is  a  shame  to  him 
that  he  did  not.  But  whether  his  accusations  be 
true  or  false,  it  remains  that  this  scholar  with  a 
martyr's  courage  had  also  the  manners  of  a  fishwife. 
2.  Protestant  writers  are  apt  to  swallow  Hippol- 
ytus  uncritically  because  he  says  horrible  things 
about  bishops  of  Home.  They  are  so  horrible  that  it 
becomes  absurd  to  suppose  that  Roman  Christianity 
endured  them.  The  quarrel  about  discipline  will 
carry  us  into  the  very  centre  of  the  strife.  We  have 
seen  (p.  298)  how  the  Puritan  party  had  viewed  the 
subject  of  pardon  for  post-baptismal  sin.  The 
Church's  mind  was  awakening  to  the  thought  that 
extremes  of  severe  discipline  were  not  good.  At 
Rome  the  party  of  Zephyrinus,  the  majority  of  the 
Church,  was  in  favor  of  relaxation.  Of  course,  the 
party  of  Hippolytus  took  the  other  view  and  de- 
clared that  relaxation  meant  laxity.  To  be  fair  to 
them,  probably  it  did.     Very  likely  it  was  a  growing 


310  The  Post-Apostolic  Aye. 

carelessness  of  sin  more  than  a  deepening  sense  of 
the  mercy  of  God  that  moved  many  to  favor  the  new 
discipline.  Very  likely  the  change  was  so  taken  by 
careless  souls  as  to  make  sin  abound.  Good  deeds 
are  sometimes  proposed  from  mean  motives,  and  oc- 
casionally a  real  forward  movement  in  history  has 
left  most  of  the  best  and  wisest  men  on  what  time 
showed  to  be  the  wrong  side.  Here  again  we  have 
no  means  of  hearing  the  other  side  of  the  story,  but 
we  have  no  ground  for  supposing  that  Zephyrinus 
and  Callistus  really  rejoiced  in  spreading  immorality, 
and  from  Hippolytus  himself  we  can  gather  one 
point  in  their  favor.  He  represents  Zephyrinus  as 
wholly  under  the  influence  of  Callistus.  Then  the 
whole  scheme  of  change  may  be  credited  to  one 
brain.  It  is  noteworthy,  and  it  looks  like  practical 
wisdom,  that  restoration  through  long  penitence  was 
offered  to  only  one  class  of  offenders  first,  to  those 
who  had  been  guilty  of  adultery.  This  was  in  the 
episcopate  of  Zephyrinus.  Then  after  some  years' 
trial  of  the  new  discipline,  a  similar  hope  of  restora- 
tion was  opened  to  all  penitents.  Indeed,  the  real 
question  at  issue  was  one  that  might  tax  to  the  ut- 
termost that  wisdom  which  is  first  pure,  then  peace- 
able. It  was  the  question  how  to  deal  with  persons 
who  had  fallen  into  fearful  sins  and  were  now 
deeply  penitent.  The  Puritan  party  insisted  on 
treating  it  as  a  simple  question  between  good  and 
evil.  They  described  the  tenderer  and  wiser  course 
as  a  mere  encouragement  to  adultery  and  murder. 
They  spoke  of  admitting  "  murderers  "  and  "  adul- 
terers "  to  communion,  instead  of  saying,  "  Persons 


The  Scandal  concerning  St.    Gallistus.         311 

who  were  such  years  ago,  but  now  are  humble  peni- 
tents." Plainly  the  Puritan  representation  was  unfair. 
But  Hippolytus  has  worse  than  this.  He  says 
that  Zephyrinus,  "  an  uninformed  and  shamefully 
corrupt  man,"  took  bribes  to  allow  Cleomenes,  "  an 
alien  in  life  and  habits  from  the  Church,"  to  go  on 
teaching  the  heresy  of  Noetus  undisturbed.  Then, 
to  be  sure,  he  adds  that  Zephyrinus  fell  headlong 
into  the  same  heresy,  which  throws  doubt  on  the 
suggestion  that  what  he  did  in  its  favor,  whatever 
that  may  have  been,  was  done  for  money.  But  a 
worse  story  is  told  of  Callistus.  He  had  been  a 
slave  of  one  Carpophorus,  a  rich  Christian  of  Cae- 
sar's household,  and  had  by  him  been  put  in  charge 
of  a  savings  bank  in  which  many  Christians  were 
induced  to  make  deposits.  The  bank  broke,  as 
banks  will  at  times,  and  the  slave  ran  away,  with 
his  master  in  hot  pursuit.  Hippolytus  says  it  was 
a  case  of  embezzlement.  It  may  be  suggested, 
however,  that  when  bank  presidents  were  slaves,  it 
was  safer  for  them  to  run  away,  when  the  bank 
failed  disastrously,  even  though  they  might  be 
utterly  guileless  in  the  matter.  Perhaps,  indeed, 
an  embezzler  would  have  managed  his  running 
away  more  skilfully.  At  any  rate,  the  slave  was 
caught,  we  are  told,  brought  back  and  put  into  the 
treadmill,  the  lowest  depth  of  slave  life.  Presently 
clamorous  depositors  wanted  him  restored  to  his 
old  position.  They  thought  he  had  money  con- 
cealed, says  Hippolytus,  and  that  he  would  pay  it 
over  to  them  !  They  thought,  after  their  first  flurry 
was  over,  that  he  was  an  honest  and  capable  mana- 


312  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

ger  after  all,  says  common  sense.  Then  follows  a 
curious  turn.  Callistus  makes  a  disturbance  in  a 
Jewish  Synagogue,  is  nearly  killed  by  the  infuriated 
congregation,  and  being  tried  before  the  City  Pre- 
fect, is  condemned  to  the  Sardinian  mines.  Thick 
darkness  covers  this  business.  The  explanation  of 
Hippolytus,  that  Callistus  wanted  to  commit  sui- 
cide, is  one  that  does  not  explain.  There  are  easier 
and  surer  ways.  After  a  time  Marcia,  the  emper- 
or's mistress,  intercedes  for  the  Christians  suffering 
in  the  mines,  and  secures  their  release.  Bishop 
Victor  gives  a  list  of  such,  but  does  not  include 
Callistus.  It  may  be  true  enough.  Callistus  was 
not  exiled  as  a  Christian,  and  his  return  might 
anger  the  Jews,  and  result  in  bringing  down  a 
fresh  persecution  upon  the  whole  Christian  com- 
munity. The  officer  who  had  charge  of  the  return 
knew  so  little  about  Christian  affairs  that  on  find- 
ing a  Christian  captive  that  was  not  on  the  bishop's 
list,  he  readily  concluded  that  it  was  a  case  of  over- 
sight, and  brought  him  with  the  rest.  Did  Victor 
denounce  him  as  an  escaped  criminal,  or  excom- 
municate him  as  a  detected  scoundrel?  No!  Even 
Hippolytus  does  not  claim  that.  He  simply  prom- 
ised him  an  allowance  from  the  Church  funds,  if  he 
would  live  at  Antium,  thirty-four  miles  away. 
Surely  the  just  inference  is  that  Victor  thought  him 
a  good  Christian,  but  a  dangerous  one  to  have  in 
Rome  just  then. 

We  turn  a  page, — it  must  be  remembered  that 
Hippolytus  is  our  one  authority  for  the  alleged 
facts  of  this  extraordinary  narrative, — and  we  find 


Did  Christians  Choose  an  Embezzler  as  Bishop?  313 


the  next  bishop,  Zephyrinus,  calling  Callistus  from 
his  retirement,  setting  him  over  "the  Cemetery,"1 
appointing  him  his  "  archdeacon,"  chief  business 
man  this,  and  administrator  of  Church  funds,  in 
the  whole  Christian  community,  and  making  him  in 
every  way  his  right  hand  man.  The  return  from 
Sardinia  must  have  had  place  as  early  as  193,  for 
Commodus  died  in  that  year.  It  was  probably  a 
grace  marking  the  tenth  year  of  Commodus,  190. 
Zephyrinus  comes  to  the  bishop's  chair  in  198.  He 
continues  for  eighteen  or  nineteen  years,  and  at  the 
close  of  that  long  period  his  archdeacon  is  chosen  to 
be  bishop  in  his  place.  Hippolytus  asks  us  to  be- 
lieve that  this  man,  so  much  trusted  with  adminis- 
trative power,  so  long  conspicuously  known,  was 
chosen  bishop  in  spite  of  being  quite  notoriously  a 
miserable  embezzler,  a  wretched  cheat,  and  a  wilful 
corrupter  of  the  Church's  faith  and  morals.  Says 
Dean  Mil  man  in  his  Latin  Christianity,  uThis  singu- 
lar picture  of  Roman  and  Christian  middle  [he 
seems  to  mean  '  middle  class']  life,  has  an  air  of 
minute  truthfulness,  though  possibly  darkened  by 
polemical  hostility."  Is  it  too  venturesome  to  main- 
tain, on  the  other  hand,  that  this  mass  of  scandal  is 
a  fable   flimsy   enough  to  fall  by    its   own  weight? 


1  The  first  Cemetery  owned  by  the  Roman  Church,  as  distin- 
guished from  cemeteries  owned  by  Christian  families  and  opened 
to  other  Christians  by  private  arrangement.  It  is  still  known 
as  the  Cemetery,  or  Catacomb,  of  St.  Callistus, — the  spelling 
Calixtus  is  a  mere  mediaeval  blunder, — and  is  noteworthy  as  be- 
ing the  burial-place  of  twelve  or  thirteen  bishops  of  Rome  be- 
tween the  years  225  and  315,  and  still  more  as  the  burial-place 
of  the  martyred  St.  Cecilia,  whose  noble  family  are  supposed  to 
have  given  the  Church  this  great  gift. 


314  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

The  Church  of  the  Imperial  City  was  not  officered 
by  a  combination  of  thieves  and  scoundrels  with 
imbeciles,  in  those  early  days  when  it  was  still  a 
school  of  martyrs.  Yet  it  did  contain  people  that 
could  lose  their  tempers  pitifully,  and  believe,  and 
say,  dreadful  things  of  their  opponents,  things 
which  neither  party  would  have  been  capable  of 
doing. 

Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  it  has  been  said  before, 
have  left  no  record  of  their  side  of  the  story.  A 
strange  witness  rises  in  their  defence.  It  is  no  other 
than  the  marble  chair  in  which  Hippolytus  sits  with 
sealed  lips,  awaiting  the  verdict  of  posterity.  Cal- 
listus died  in  222.  Thirteen  years  later  a  sudden 
blast  of  persecution  swept  away  together  Pontianus, 
his  second  successor,  and  Hippolytus,  his  old-time 
rival,  to  those  same  Sardinian  mines  where  Callistus 
himself  had  dragged  his  chain  forty-five  years  be- 
fore. Within  a  year  or  two  both  bishop  and  coadjutor 
were  dead.  In  238  the  bodies  of  both  were  brought 
to  Rome  and  buried,  in  different  cemeteries,  on  the 
same  August  day.  The  friends  of  Hippolytus  set 
up  this  statue  of  him,  and  by  common  consent  the 
Philosophoumena  with  its  horrid  scandals  ivas  omitted 
from  the  list  of  his  works.  Mute  testimony,  but 
powerful.  Both  parties  were  united  in  doing  honor 
to  a  man  who  had  done  the  Church  great  service, 
but  on  the  basis  of  suppressing  the  accusations 
which  he  had  scattered  abroad  in  blind  wrath. 

One  more  noteworthy  circumstance.  Hippolytus 
charges  Callistus  and  his  "  school "  with  receiving 
persons  whom  he  himself  had  excommunicated,  but 


The  Roman  Bishops  Did  not  Go  to  Extremes.  315 

he  never  hints  that  Callistus  had  excommunicated 
him.  Probably  he  had  not.  The  Roman  bishops 
went  on  their  way  in  a  truly  Catholic  temper,  it 
would  seem,  once  flinging  out  an  accusation  of 
heresy  against  the  coadjutor,  but  not  on  second 
thoughts  pressing  it,  and  refusing  to  be  responsible 
for  the  making  of  a  sect.  This  alone  will  account 
for  our  hearing  nothing  in  history  of  what  was  prac- 
tically a  schism  in  the  Roman  Church.  As  long  as 
the  bishop  excommunicated  nobody,  he  had  no  mes- 
sages to  send  to  foreign  Churches,  announcing  acts 
of  discipline.  The  coadjutor  in  charge  of  the  foreign 
populations  might  rage  and  rave,  and  call  his  follow- 
ing "  the  Church,"  and  describe  the  rest  of  the 
Church  at  Rome  as  a  mere  "  Callistian  School." 
The  authorities  took  no  notice  of  him,  and  treated 
both  parties  alike, —  Who  art  thou  thatjudgest  another 
man's  servant?  was  their  motto  according  to  Hip- 
polytus  himself, — and  at  last  they  had  their  reward. 
The  quarrel  died  with  the  bitter  old  man  who  was 
the  leader  in.it,  and  the  judgment  of  the  Church  ac- 
knowledged the  rival  leaders  as  saints,  Zephyrinus 
and  Callistus  for  the  general  tenor  of  their  lives,  as 
the  Church  judged  of  them,  and  Hippolytus,  partly 
for  his  gifts  as  a  teacher,  but  mainly,  we  must  be- 
lieve, for  the  glory  of  his  death  conceived  as  a  mar- 
tyrdom. 1 

xThat  Hippolytus  lived  more  than  twenty  years  later  than  is 
here  stated,  that  he  joined  the  Puritan  schism  of  Novatus,  and 
afterwards  repented,  and  that  he  was  dragged  to  death  by  wild 
horses,  like  the  Hippolytus  of  Greek  tragedy,  belongs  to  the  do- 
main of  legend.  It  is  maintained,  however,  by  Bishop  Words- 
worth in  his  Church  History,  while  it  is  antagonized  by  Bishop 
Lightfoot  in  his  Clement,  ii.  424. 


316  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

It  remains  to  say,  that  even  if  we  reject  the  larger 
part  of  the  evidence  of  Hippolytus  as  false  witness, 
one  fact  stands  out  conspicuous  and  cannot  be  done 
away.  The  most  learned  theologian  of  the  Roman 
Church  in  the  early  part  of  the  third  century  charged 
two  successive  bishops  of  Rome  with  heresy.  He 
did  not  think  it  a  particularly  wicked  thing  to  sepa- 
rate himself  from  their  communion.  He  had  no 
idea  that  they  were  infallible  teachers  of  the  Church. 


CHAPTER  X. 

EARLY  THEOLOGIANS  OF  THE  EAST  :   THE  SCHOOL  OF 
ALEXANDRIA  ;    CLEMENT  ;    ORIGEN. 

LEXANDRIA,  commercial  metropolis  of 
Egypt,  and  in  population  certainly  the 
second  city  of  the  Roman  Empire,  was 
peculiarly  a  city  of  providence,  curi- 
ously prepared  to  play  a  special  part  in 
the  history  of  revelation  and  redemption.  It  was 
not  an  evolution,  as  most  cities  are,  but  a  special 
creation,  called  into  being  by  Alexander  the  Great, 
after  his  destruction  of  Tyre  in  332  B.  c,  as  a  monu- 
ment to  himself.  Egyptian  in  its  location  and  its 
resources,— Egypt  came  to  be  the  granary  of  Rome, 
the  chief  source  of  the  food-supply  of  the  capital 
in  the  early  Christian  centuries, — Alexandria  was  in 
the  leading  elements  of  its  population  a  meeting- 
place  of  Greek  and  Jew.  Those  two  nationalities 
furnished  the  chief  colonists  and  capitalists  of  the 
new  city,  and  we  read  that  in  the  clays  of  its  chief 
prosperity,  as  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian 
era,  two  of  its  five  wards  were  distinctively  a  Jewish 
quarter,  and  Jews  were  numerous  in  the  other  three. 
By  this  time  the  population  numbered  300,000  free 
citizens,  which  would  imply  fully  600,000  inhabit- 
ants in  all.  A  good  half  of  the  city's  wealth  and 
power  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  in  Jewish  con- 
trol, beneath  the  overruling  authority  of  Rome. 

317 


318  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

To  this  singular  mingling  of  Greek  and  Jew  as 
powers  so  nearly  equal  that  they  could  not  by  any 
possibility  ignore  one  another,  it  must  be  added  that 
the  new  city  became  a  great  centre  of  education,  of 
culture,  and  of  profound  thought.  In  the  division 
of  Alexander's  empire  it  came  to  pass  that  Egypt 
was  ruled  by  lovers  of  learning.  The  early  Ptole- 
mies laid  the  foundations  of  a  library  that  came  to 
be  one  of  the  wonders  of  the  world,  and  a  univer- 
sity, under  the  name  of  the  Museum,  which  attracted 
students  from  every  side.  Greek  philosophy  was  al- 
ways enquiring  after  the  origin  of  this  world  and 
the  causes  of  all  things  that  now  exist.  Hebrew 
Scripture  was  continually  offering  an  answer  to  those 
great  questions  of  the  hungry  soul.  In  Alexandria, 
as  in  no  other  city  of  the  ancient  world,  the  Greek 
question  and  the  Jewish  answer  were  brought  face 
to  face,  so  that  each  must  influence  the  other.  Sons 
of  rich  Jewish  families  found  their  way  into  the 
university  and  learned  to  respect  the  philosophic 
methods  and  results  of  the  Greek  teachers.  These 
in  turn  became  interested  in  what  they  heard  of  the 
sacred  books  of  the  Hebrew  people.  Those  books 
were  translated  into  Greek  by  a  series  of  scholars, 
beginning  in  the  first  half  of  the  third  century  B.  c. 
(say  about  280),  and  closing  within  the  next  hundred 
years,  the  result  being  what  is  now  called  the  Sep- 
tuagint  Version  of  the  Old  Testament,  commonly 
referred  to  as  the  LXX.  A  legend  ascribing  the 
origin  of  this  version  to  an  express  command  of  King 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  has  probably  at  least  a  grain 
of    truth.     Lovers   of   learning   in    the    schools   of 


The  Divine  Apathy.  319 

Grecian  philosophy  were  glad  to  take  knowledge  of 
the  Mosaic  account  of  the  creation,  and  of  what 
professed  to  be  a  revelation  of  one  true  God. 

So  at  Alexandria  the  philosophy  of  the  Greek  and 
the  revelation  of  the  Jew  met  and  mingled,  and  the 
result  was  that  a  great  educational  centre  was  meas- 
urably prepared  for  two  chief  Christian  teachings, 
the  Unity  and  the  Trinity  of  the  Divine  Being. 
Even  heathen  philosophy  had  felt  that  somehow 
there  must  be  one  single  Cause  back  of  all  causes, 
one  great  Answer  to  all  the  questions  of  the  soul. 
The  very  first  Cause  of  all  causes,  they  would  argue, 
must  be  not  manifold,  but  One.  The  sturdy  mono- 
theism of  an  influential  Jewish  population  was  a 
great  help  in  making  that  idea  felt.  But  the  influ- 
ence was  not  all  on  one  side.  The  heathen  philoso- 
phy made  its  First  Cause  to  be  a  Power,  rather  than 
a  Person.  Every  thought  of  a  man's  mind,  every 
feeling  of  his  heart,  has  a  cause.  Then,  said  our 
philosophers,  the  First  Cause  lies  back  of  all  thought 
and  all  feeling,  and  It  has  no  such  movements  within 
Itself.  That  was  the  doctrine  of  the  "  Divine 
Apathy,"  making  out  that  the  Cause  of  all  things 
must  be  passionless,  which  is  in  plainer  English,  un- 
feeling. The  Alexandrian  Jew  adopted  this  notion 
and  began  to  be  ashamed  of  everything  in  his  sacred 
books  that  spoke  of  God  as  loving,  hating,  repent- 
ing, being  angry,  as  hiding  His  face,  as  making  bare 
His  arm.  Again  the  heathen  teachers  complained 
quite  honestly  that  the  Old  Testament  sanctioned 
cruelties  and  immoralities.  To  this  last  difficulty, 
the  modern   answer  would  say,  "  God  was  putting 


320  The  Post-Apostolic  Aye. 

our  race  to  school.  In  every  age  He  leads  His  peo- 
ple to  things  above  themselves  ;  but  in  every  age  He 
must  be  content  to  hold  them  to  a  moral  level  which 
some  future  age  will  leave  far  behind."  In  ancient 
days  the  answers  were  two.  That  of  the  Gnostic 
heretic  declared  the  God  of  creation  and  of  the  Old 
Testament  to  be  an  evil  power.  That  of  the  Alex- 
andrine Jew  declared  that  the  books  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament do  not  mean  what  they  seem  to  say.  They 
are  full  of  allegory.  They  must  be  taken  as  a  sort 
of  cipher-writing,  in  which  great  truths  are  hidden 
away,  for  the  wise  to  discover,  if  they  can.  One 
more  difficulty  raised  by  the  philosophers  must  here 
be  named.  Insisting  that  there  could  be  but  one 
First  Cause  of  all  things,  they  were  led  to  ask  how 
the  Perfect  Cause  could  produce  evil  as  a  result  ? 
Plato's  answer  had  been  to  assume  the  eternal  exist- 
ence of  matter,  and  Platonism,  noblest  of  the  Greek 
philosophies,  was  the  chief  favorite  among  the 
teachers  of  the  Alexandrian  University.  The  Alex- 
andrian Jews  were  inclined  to  accept  that  idea. 
Even  a  Perfect  Worker  could  not  with  such  material 
turn  out  anything  but  an  imperfect  result.  All  that 
.  God  had  made,  God  had  pronounced  very  good. 
But  God  did  not  make  matter.  He  only  made  the 
best  that  He  could  of  it,  when  He  had  it  to  deal  with 
as  an  eternal  condition  of  His  creative  work. 

Philo,  a  rich  Jew  of  Alexandria,  commonly  quoted 
as  Philo  Judseus,  is  our  principal  representative  of 
the  result  of  submitting  Jewish  belief  to  the  in- 
fluence of  heathen  culture.  The  most  interesting 
thing  about  his  writings  is  the  fact  that  it  was  given 


The  Logos  in  Philo.  321 

him  to  make  a  bridge  over  which  heathen  philoso- 
phy might  pass  to  reach  the  Christian  conception  of 
the  Trinity.  Philo  had  learned  to  believe  in  the 
"  Divine  Apathy,"  to  think  of  the  First  Cause  as  ly- 
ing back  of  all  thought  and  feeling  and  power.  And 
yet  thought  and  power  must  precede  creation,  and 
be  used  as  instruments  of  creation.  Plato  had 
taught  that  the  ideas  of  all  created  things  were 
themselves  independent  realities.  So  Philo  taught 
that  sundry  thoughts  and  potencies  of  God  had  a 
separate  existence,  and  some  of  them  he  regarded  as 
personal,  identifying  them  with  the  angels  or  with 
the  cherubim.  But  chiefest  of  all  such  forces  was 
that  which  he  called  the  Logos.  This  Greek  word 
has  the  meaning  of  an  "  utterance,"  a  "  telling,"  and 
it  has  the  double  use  that  we  ourselves  give  to  such 
words  as  "  tale  "  and  "  account."  We  speak  of  a 
"  tale  that  is  told,"  an  "account  of  a  transaction,"  or 
again  of  "  the  tale  of  brick,"  h<  an  account  current." 
Logos  also  may  mean  "narrative,"  or  it  may  mean 
"reckoning."  But  much  more,  as  we  say  that  a 
man  "  speaks  his  mind,"  so  the  Greeks  felt  that 
a  man's  utterance  of  himself  was  a  revelation  of 
the  mind  that  was  in  him,  it  was  the  mind  shown 
forth,  and  so  this  great  word  for  "  utterance  "  came 
to  have  the  two  additional  senses  of  "reason"  (both 
of  the  reasoning  mind  and  of  the  reason  why)  and 
of  "plan."  It  was  taken  up  by  St.  John  to  de- 
scribe the  office  of  the  Son  of  God  as  the  eternal 
utterance  of  the  Divine  mind,  and  it  has  become 
familiar  to  us  in  the  rendering  "  Word."  That  is 
perhaps  the  best  possible  English  for  it,  but  Logos 
u 


322  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


never  means  so  little  as  a  single  word.  It  is  always 
a  "statement."  It  is  an  utterance  that  tells  some- 
thing. Philo  used  it  to  express  nothing  less  than 
the  Mind  of  God  declaring  itself,  all  that  God  has 
to  say.  But  then  the  Mind  of  God  must  be  a  Per- 
sonal Mind,  and  it  must  belong  also  to  God's  Essen- 
tial Being.  If  then  we  can  at  all  distinguish  be- 
tween the  Deity  and  the  Mind  by  which  He  utters 
Himself,  we  have  at  once  the  beginning  of  a  theory 
of  Personal  distinctions  in  the  indivisible  Divine 
Essence.  Thus  the  Divine  Logos  was  proclaimed  in 
Alexandria  before  Jesus  Christ  was  preached  there, 
and  proclaimed  as  being  that  Wisdom  who  says  in 
the  Proverbs  (viii.  22,  23),  "  The  Lord  possessed  Me 
in  the  beginning  of  His  way  before  His  works  of  old. 
I  was  set  up  from  everlasting ,  from  the  beginning,  or 
ever  the  earth  ivas." 

The  peculiar  conditions  of  philosophical  and  reli- 
gious thought  which  grew  up  at  Alexandria  did 
much  to  help  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  and  much 
also  to  hinder  it.  In  some  ways  they  greatly  fav- 
ored Gnostic  developments.  But  chiefly,  and 
whether  for  good  or  evil,  these  Alexandrian  spec- 
ulations created  an  atmosphere  in  which  Alexan- 
drian Christianity  had  to  learn  to  breathe.  There, 
at  any  rate,  the  philosopher  turned  Christian  must 
defend  Christianity  by  philosophic  methods,  express 
Christian  doctrine  in  philosophical  terms,  commend 
his  religious  attitude  to  his  fellow-enquirers  by  pro- 
pounding Revelation  as  the  crown  of  Reason.  There 
is  an  intellectual  conscience,  as  well  as  a  conscience 
about  external  behaviour,  in  the  world.    The  Church 


The  Catechetical  School  323 

that  would  convert  the  world  must  learn  to  speak 
to  that  conscience.  It  was  at  Alexandria  that  the 
Catholic  Church  of  the  second  century  began  to 
learn  to  perform  that  part  of  its  Catholic  duty  on 
a  great  scale. 

I.  The  Catechetical  School  The  origin  of  the 
Catechetical  School  of  Alexandria  is  lost  in  obscur- 
ity. It  is  easy  to  see  that  in  such  a  city  the  prepa- 
ration of  candidates  for  baptism  would  have  had  to 
be  more  careful  and  thorough  on  the  intellectual 
side  than  in  places  where  the  population  was  not  so 
much  exercised  in  the  discussion  of  questions  philo- 
sophical and  religious.  The  training  which  in  other 
centres  was  comparatively  informal  and  conducted 
by  the  clergy  of  the  several  congregations,  came  in 
Alexandria  to  be  a  thing  systematic  and  precise, 
ministered  by  a  professional  teacher  of  the  highest 
eminence.  Hence,  while  the  school  was  always 
known  as  "  the  Catechetical  School,"  and  the  prep- 
aration of  catechumens  was  probably  always  one  of 
its  chief  aims,  it  must  have  been  a  great  deal  more. 
All  that  a  "Church  Hall"  could  be  to  day  in  a  uni- 
versity where  most  of  the  teaching  staff  were  non- 
Christian  thinkers,  and  all  that  a  school  of  training 
for  Holy  Orders  could  be  in  the  midst  of  a  heathen 
population  profoundly  intellectual  and  thoroughly 
acute, — all  that  was  this  Catechetical  School,  with 
no  stately  buildings,  no  munificent  endowments, 
where  from  morning  to  night  a  Christian  philoso- 
pher sat  in  his  poor  lodging,  and  lectured,  argued, 
expounded  Scripture,  systematized  doctrine,  for  all 
sorts  of  enquirers,  men   and  women,  young  and  old, 


324  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


Christian  and  heathen,  the  rich  who  brought  pay- 
ment, and  the  poor  who  brought  none. 

Philip  of  Side,  a  presbyter  of  Constantinople  in 
the  first  half  of  the  fifth  century,  says  that  the  first 
teacher  of  this  famous  school  was  Athenagoras  the 
Apologist.  Philip  knew  but  little  about  history,  but 
he  was  a  pupil  of  the  school  himself  in  the  last  years 
before  it  was  transplanted  from  Alexandria  and 
killed,  and  it  seems  more  likely  than  not  that  the 
school's  own  tradition  of  the  name  of  its  first  teacher 
was  a  true  one.  Athenagoras  must  have  written  his 
Apology  very  near  the  year  176.  According  to 
Eusebius  it  was  about  the  time  (a.  d.  180)  of  the 
accession  of  Commodus  that  the  Alexandrian  school 
came  into  the  hands  of  the  first  teacher  of  whom  we 
can  feel  quite  certain.  This  was  the  presbyter  Pan- 
taenus,  a  native  of  Sicily, — "  the  Sicilian  bee,"  his 
successor  Clement  called  him,  in  admiration  of  his 
diligence  in  gathering  treasures  of  knowledge, — and 
manifestly  a  man  of  versatility  and  power.  He 
wrote  many  commentaries  on  Holy  Scripture,  all 
lost,  but  the  most  notable  fact  of  his  life  is  that 
about  190  he  went  on  a  missionary  journey  to  India, 
in  answer  to  a  request  from  Christians  of  that  coun- 
try and  by  advice  of  his  bishop  Demetrius.  A 
heathen  writer,  Dion  Chrysostomus,  writing  about  a 
century  earlier,  names  Ethiopians,  Arabians,  Bac- 
trians,  Scythians,  Persians,  and  Indians,  as  flocking 
to  Alexandria  in  his  time.  That  illustrates  vividly 
the  place  of  Alexandria  in  the  world  of  thought. 
Still  more  striking  as  an  illustration  of  the  Alexan- 
drine temper  is  the  spectacle  of  that  great  Church 


Clement  of  Alexandria.  325 

deliberately  depriving  itself  of  its  chief  teacher,  the 
principal  defender  of  its  faith  against  the  ponderous 
opposition  of  the  great  heathen  university,  to  send 
him  to  maintain  the  Christian  cause  as  against  Brah- 
man subtleties  in  the  far  East.  The  idea  that  for 
missionary  work  among  a  subtly  intellectual  people 
the  Church  must  send  the  best  she  had,  and  not 
what  she  could  best  spare,  is  one  of  the  finest  tradi- 
tions of  the  Church's  first  great  school  of  theology. 

II.  Clement.  Before  Pantsenus  went  on  his  jour- 
ney, he  had  had  for  some  time  an  ardent  pupil,  who 
seems  probably  to  have  become  his  locum  tenens  dur- 
ing his  absence,  his  colleague  after  his  return,  and 
his  successor  at  his  death,  another  presbyter,  who, 
whatever  his  origin,  is  always  known  as  Clement  of 
Alexandria.1  He  is  called  by  some  early  writers  an 
Athenian,  and  Athens  was  probably  the  place  of  his 
education  at  any  rate,  if  not  of  his  birth.  He  seems 
to  have  been  a  convert,  not  brought  up  to  be  a  be- 
liever from  the  first,  and  his  account  of  his  successive 
teachers  reminds  one  a  little  of  Justin  Martyr's 
quest  of  truth.  But  there  is  an  important  difference. 
Justin  speaks  in  the  tone  of  one  who  tried  one  phi- 
losophy after  another,  and  left  the  last  one  behind  to 
become  a  Christian.  Though  he  still  wore  the  phi- 
losopher's cloak,  and  taught  in  the  philosophical 
manner,  he  yet  regarded  himself  as  one  who  had  ex- 

'His  fall  name,  Titus  Flavins  Clemens,  exactly  reproducing  the 
name  of  the  consul  whom  Domitian  put  to  death  (p.  31),  implies 
some  connection  with  that  same  distinguished  Roman  family,  but 
it  may  well  be  that  he  was  the  son  or  grandson  of  a  prosperous 
freedman  of  the  noble  house.  There  is  no  reason  for  connecting 
him  any  more  nearly  with  the  consul  or  with  Clement  of  Rome. 


326  The  Post -Apostolic  Aye. 

changed  even  Platonism  for  Christianity.  Clement, 
on  the  other  hand,  does  not  regard  Christianity  and 
the  heathen  philosophies  as  two  mutually  exclusive 
answers  to  the  same  questions,  but  rather  as  two  ad- 
joining fields,  in  each  of  which  a  wise  man  may  find 
treasure.  Pie  does  not  become  a  Christian  instead 
of  a  Platonist,  but  a  Platonist  who  in  his  search  for 
truth  has  found  in  Jesus  Christ  a  Divine  Revealer. 
Clement  is  sure  that  the  spirit  of  philosophic  enquiry 
is  an  impulse  from  God,  and  he  cannot  rest  till  he 
has  a  system  of  theology  and  a  system  of  philosophy, 
and  the  two  well  fitted  together. 

To  that  end  he  studied  in  Greece  and  in  Magna 
Grsecia, — the  portion  of  Southern  Italy  largely  colo- 
nized by  Greeks,1 — in  Palestine,  and  finally  in  Egypt, 
and  after  listening  to  five  other  examples  of  the 
"Apostolic  Succession,"  to  use  a  phrase  of  Eusebius 
for  the  line  of  teachers  by  whom  the  Christian  tradi- 
tion was  handed  down,  he  found  in  Pantsenus  pre- 
cisely that  union  of  religion  and  science  which  he 
was  craving.  An  uneventful  life  was  that  of  this 
scholar  Clement.  Whether  he  was  young,  or  in 
middle  life,  or  even  elderly,  when  he  came  to  Alex- 
andria and  found  rest  for  his  seeking  soul,  we  cannot 
tell.  We  know  only  that  he  was  for  some  years  at 
the  head  of  the'  school  whose  teachings  had  meant  so 
much  to  him,  that  he  fled  from  Alexandria  in  the 
persecution  under  Severus  in  202,  and  that  he  is  last 
heard  of  about  ten  years  later,  when  he  is  bearer  of 

!This  use  of  Magna  Grsecia  is  faintly  comparable  with  the  use 
of  "Greater  Britain"  as  a  designation  of  the  English-speaking 
countries  of  the  world. 


Clement  Really   Orthodox.  327 

a  letter  to  the  Church  at  Antioch  from  Alexander, 
bishop  of  a  Cappadocian  see,  an  old  pupil  of  his, 
who  speaks  of  him  warmly  and  of  his  services  to  the 
Church. 

What  then,  were  the  services  of  Clement  at  Alex- 
andria ?  They  were  in  brief,  to  maintain  as  against 
the  stupid  party  in  the  Church  the  honor  of  knowl- 
edge as  a  part  of  Christian  achievement,  and  as 
against  the  Gnostics  the  claim  that  the  true  "  Gnos- 
tic," the  "  man  who  knows,"  is  he  who  begins  with 
accepting  the  Catholic  faith  as  revealed  truth,  and 
then  goes  on  to  bring  all  other  knowledge  into  rela- 
tion with  it.  "  The  stupid  party  "  is  not  too  strong 
a  phrase  for  those  whom  Clement  calls  "  Orthodox- 
asts,"  "  Mere  Scolds,"  and  "  People  scared  by  a 
sound,"  a  party  who  even  in  intellectual  Alexan- 
dria observed  that  some  students  of  philosophy  were 
drawn  to  Christianity,  while  a  greater  number  rejected 
it,  and  so  came  to  the  sapient  conclusion  that  phi- 
losophy was  a  godless  and  dangerous  study.  They 
clamored  for  "  the  simple  faith."  They  thought  it 
dangerous  to  indulge  in  any  opinions  in  the  open 
field  of  free  theology  or  philosophy.  They  regarded 
every  attempt  to  restate  the  faith  in  terms  of  the  pre- 
vailing philosophies  as  presumably  heretical.  They 
would  not  even  discuss  their  own  charges.  They 
would  only  denounce  the  explorers  who  ventured  to 
use  new  phrases  and  say  over  old  truths  in  an  un- 
precedented way. 

But  was  Clement  really  orthodox  after  all?  Cer- 
tainly he  always  claimed  to  be.  That  phrase  of 
Eusebius  in  which  he  uses  "  Apostolic  Succession  " 


328  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

to  mean  the  traditional  descent  of  Christian  doctrine 
from  the  Apostles  through  successive  teachers  of  the 
Church  might  well  have  been  Clement's  own.  His 
account  of  all  his  Christian  teachers,  as  quoted  by 
Eusebius  {History  v.  11),  is  this  :  "  These  men  pre- 
serving the  true  tradition  of  the  blessed  doctrine  di- 
rectly from  the  holy  Apostles,  Peter  and  James  and 
John  and  Paul,  the  son  receiving  it  from  the  father 
(but  few  were  like  the  fathers),  have  come  even  to  us 
by  the  will  of  God,  to  deposit  these  ancestral  and 
Apostolic  seeds."  Clement  believed  profoundly  that 
his  theology  was  a  traditional  theology,  and  not  only 
that  he  did  in  fact  agree  with  Christian  teachers  that 
went  before  him,  but  that  he  was  bound  to.  "  The 
Church's  rule,"  "the  rule  of  the  truth,"  "the  tradi- 
tion of  the  Lord," — such  phrases  are  often  on  his 
tongue.  He  describes  the  true  Gnostic  as  "main- 
taining Apostolic  and  ecclesiastical  orthodoxy  in  doc- 
trines." He  speaks  of  heretics  as  "  not  having  the  key 
of  entrance,  but  a  false  and  (as  the  common  phrase 
expresses  it)  a  counterfeit  key,  by  which  they  do  not 
enter  in,  as  we  enter  in,  through  the  tradition  of  the 
Lord."  He  is  as  sure  of  the  oneness  of  the  Church 
and  the  Faith  as  Tertullian  or  Trenasus  could  be. 
"In  substance  and  idea,  in  origin,  in  preeminence, 
we  say  that  the  ancient  and  Catholic  Church  is 
alone,  collecting  as  it  does  into  the  unity  of  the  one 
faith  .  .  .  those  already  ordained,  whom  God 
predestinated.  .  .  .  But  the  preeminence  of  the 
Church  as  the  principle  of  union  is  in  its  oneness,  in 
this  surpassing  all  things  else,  and  having  nothing 
like  or  equal  to  itself"  (Stromata  vii.  16,  17). 


Clement's    Writings.  329 

Yet  even  where  two  men  believe  truly  the  same 
set  of  truths,  each  man's  theology,  his  thought  about 
God,  will  be  colored  by  his  experience,  his  sense  of 
what  God  has  done  for  him.  To  Clement,  with  his 
eagerly  enquiring  mind,  God  had  been  chiefly  the 
great  Illuminator,  the  great  Teacher,  who  answers 
the  soul's  questions  and  shows  how  life  may  be 
made  beautiful.  He  believed  that  Jesus  Christ  was 
a  Saviour  from  sin,  but  he  thought  of  Him  much 
more  as  a  Saviour  from  ignorance  and  folly.  His 
favorite  idea  was  that  of  the  Logos,  the  utterance  of 
the  mind  of  God,  communicating  a  little  portion  of 
truth  to  the  heathen  through  philosophy,  and  now 
much  more  to  the  Christian  man  by  Revelation. 
Hence  the  same  philosophy  which  seemed  to  Tertul- 
lian  an  endeavor  of  evil  spirits  to  draw  men  away 
from  the  truth  of  God,  was  to  Clement  God's  loving 
endeavor  to  make  Himself  known  to  men  as  nearly 
as  they  were  ready  to  receive  Him.  All  the  world 
was  in  Clement's  view  a  school  of  God.  In  his  four 
principal  writings  he  undertook  to  set  forth  his  view 
of  what  a  full  course  in  that  school  would  contain. 
The  first  was  his  Hortatory  Address  to  the  Greeks, 
sometimes  quoted  as  the  Protrepticus.  In  it  he  is 
occupied  in  showing  that  heathen  philosophy  on  its 
religious  side  has  failed  to  discover  any  beautiful 
order  of  the  world,  or  to  present  an}r  noble  scheme  of 
human  life.  The  next  treatise  is  called  the  Pseda- 
gogus,  or  Instructor, psedagogus  being  the  Greek  name 
for  a  slave  who  took  a  boy  to  school,  and  was  respon- 
sible for  delivering  him  safely  into  the  master's  care. 
It  was  the  word  used  by  St.  Paul  (Gal.  iii.  24)  of 


330  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  office  of  the  law  in  bringing  men  on  their  way  to 
the  school  of  Christ.  "  Schoolmaster,"  of  course,  is 
an  impossible  rendering.  In  this  book  Clement's 
thought  is  that  our  Lord  as  the  Logos  brings  men  to 
the  point  where  they  will  receive  Plis  Christian 
Revelation,  and  so  puts  them  to  school  to  God  in  a 
higher  way  than  they  could  have  been  without  such 
leading.  One  book  is  occupied  with  an  account  of 
the  methods  of  our  Divine  Peedagogus,  and  then  two 
more  with  an  account  of  the  kind  of  life  that  He 
wishes  to  teach  His  people  to  lead.  So  far  we  have 
had,  it  has  been  excellently  pointed  out,  a  treatise  in 
the  line  of  Christian  Evidences,  and  another  in  the 
line  of  Christian  Ethics.  Clement's  third  chief 
work  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  adding  a  treatise  on 
Christian  Theology,  but  its  name  of  Stromateis,  or 
in  the  Latin  form  Stromata, — variously  rendered 
as  "  patchwork,"  or  as  "  clothes-bags,"  such  as  the 
Greeks  kept  bedding  in, — whatever  may  have  been 
its  exact  reference  in  Clement's  mind,  was  certainly 
meant  somehow  to  convey  the  idea  of  a  miscellany. 
"  This  is  not  my  whole  theology,"  the  title  pleads, 
"nor  even  any  portion  taken  out  from  a  complete 
system  of  theological  thought.  It  is  a  collection 
of  ideas  which  I  have  found  valuable."  But  here 
we  note  again  that  Clement's  favorite  ideas  belong 
mostly  to  the  theology  of  the  knowledge  of  God's 
mind,  rather  than  to  that  of  salvation  of  sin.  Two 
books  of  the  Stromateis  deal  with  the  relation  of 
Greek  philosophy  to  Christianity ;  the  third  defends 
the  true  doctrine  of  marriage  against  the  two  forms 
of  false  Gnostic  teaching,  that  which  declared  that 


Clement's  Advance  upon  Philo.  331 

all  bodily  actions  were  indifferent,  nothing  that  a 
man  did  with  his  body  affected  his  soul  at  all,  and 
that  other  which  forbade  marriage  as  a  form  of  vice ; 
the  fourth  and  fifth  books  expound  the  doctrine  of 
some  of  the  Christian  virtues ;  and  the  sixth  and 
seventh  are  meant  to  show  what  sort  of  a  man  the 
ideal  Christian,  "the  true  Gnostic,"  will  be,  and  that 
he  alone  can  be  a  true  worshipper  of  God. 

These  works  of  Clement  have  been  preserved 
nearly  entire.  The  fourth  in  his  great  series,  the 
Hypotyposes,  or  Outlines,  may  have  come  nearer  to 
containing  a  systematic  statement  of  Clement's  re- 
ligious opinions,  but  only  small  portions  of  it  remain. 
The  only  other  writing  of  Clement  that  has  come 
down  to  our  day  is  a  short  essay,  "  Who  is  the  rich 
man  that  is  in  the  way  of  Salvation  ?  "  often  quoted  by 
its  Latin  title,  Qnis  dives  salvetur  f  It  is  a  moderate 
pronouncement  on  the  dangers  of  luxury  and  self- 
indulgence  and  the  duties  that  belong  to  wealth. 

Comparing  Clement  with  the  Jewish  endeavor  to 
harmonize  religion  and  philosophy,  we  find  him  mak- 
ing a  great  advance  upon  Philo  in  two  points.  (1) 
He  will  not  acknowledge  the  preexistence  of  matter 
as  eternal  evil.  (2)  He  does  preach  man's  free-will. 
To  ascribe  the  teaching  of  free-will  to  the  Alexan- 
drian school  as  if  it  was  a  sort  of  discovery  of 
theirs,  would  be  unfair.  We  must  remember  that 
Tertullian  knew  the  idea  so  intimately  and  felt  the 
value  of  it  so  profoundly,  that  he  was  driven  to  make 
a  Latin  phrase  for  it,  and  coined  his  liberum  arbitrium 
to  be  a  guide  of  Western  thought  for  centuries.  And 
to  deny  a  conscious  notion  of  free-will  to  St.  Paul 


332  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

would  be  absurd.  But  at  Alexandria  the  idea  was 
not  in  favor.  It  was  a  bravely  independent  philoso- 
phizing, against  the  habit  of  thoughtful  men  around 
him,  which  brought  Clement  to  insist  that  the  origin 
of  evil  lay  in  the  free  action  of  created  wills.  So 
again  Clement  follows  Philo  in  a  wildly  allegorizing 
interpretation  of  Holy  Scripture,  but  he  still  holds 
fast  to  the  literal  sense  as  having  truth,  and  so  value, 
of  its  own.  "  The  sense  of  the  law,"  he  says  (Stromat. 
ii.  28),  "  is  to  be  taken  in  four  ways, — either  as  exhib- 
iting a  symbol,  or  as  laying  down  a  precept  for  right 
conduct,  or  as  uttering  a  prophecy."  Here  seem  to 
be  but  three  interpretations,  and  scholars  have  pro- 
posed to  read  "three"  instead  of  "four."  But  no! 
Clement  means  exactly  what  he  says.  The  Scripture 
has  four  kinds  of  meaning,  because  it  always  adds  to 
the  literal  sense  some  one  of  these  other  three.  As 
compared  with  Philo's,  his  allegorism  is  a  sober  re- 
turn in  the  direction  of  reverence  for  God's  actual 
word. 

Yet  Clement  had  his  faults,  and  one  was  that  he 
exalted  knowledge  overmuch.  He  read  the  words, 
The  truth  shall  make  you  free.  He  saw  that  ideals 
are  founded  on  ideas,  and  that  right  conduct  must 
depend  on  knowing  what  is  right.  He  quotes  from 
a  book  known  as  the  Gospel  to  the  Hebrews  a  say- 
ing therein  ascribed  to  our  Lord,  He  who  wonders 
shall  reign,  and  he  zvho  reigns  shall  rest  (Stromat.  ii. 
9).  The  idea  is  that  the  man  who  is  not  interested 
enough  to  wonder  about  the  great  problems  of  life, 
will  not  triumph  over  the  difficulties  of  life.  Surely 
that  is  true.     The  man  who  does  not  care, — he  is 


Faults  of  Clement's  Theology.  333 

bound  to  be  a  failure.  But  how  about  the  man  to 
whom  God  has  given  very  little  power  of  thought? 
One  may  suspect  that  Clement  would  really  have 
regarded  a  soul  incapable  of  deep  thought  as  also  in- 
capable of  high  character.  He  always,  indeed,  in- 
sisted on  love  in  his  "  true  Gnostic,"  as  well  as  on 
knowledge  and  faith.  But  he  does  seem  to  feel  as 
if  the  man  of  vision  must  be  necessarily  a  man  of 
virtue.  It  would  be  safer  to  say  that  he  who  loves 
well  will  attain  to  all  needful  knowledge,  than  to 
make  the  one  common  designation  of  the  man  who 
lives  near  to  God  in  daily  intercourse  to  be  that  of 
"  the  Gnostic,"  "  the  man  whose  knowledge  is  pro- 
found." 

Another  fault  of  Clement's  theology  was  his  adop- 
tion from  the  philosophers  of  the  notion  of  "  apathy  " 
as  the  perfect  state.  He  held  that  the  Apostles  af- 
ter the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  were  in  this  con- 
dition, in  which  love  and  faith  and  fear  continued 
as  active  principles,  but  had  ceased  to  exist  as  feel- 
ings, and  joy  and  grief  were  alike  extinct.  One  can 
hardly  imagine  St.  Paul  in  a  state  of  apathy  when 
he  was  writing  his  letters  to  the  Corinthian  Church, 
but  it  is  quite  possible  to  see  how  the  teaching  of 
apathy  as  an  ideal  might  do  much  harm  to  men  with 
but  little  of  the  Pauline  spirit  to  begin  with.  It 
would  easily  lead  to  grievous  self-deceiving,  to  cold- 
est selfishness,  to  hardest  self-satisfaction.  Yet 
Clement's  mistakes,  we  may  well  remember,  were 
the  necessary  conditions  of  his  being  a  Christian  at 
all.  His  type  of  mind  and  the  conditions  of  his 
training   made   it   necessary   for   him    to   think  his 


334  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

Christian  thoughts  in  such  a  framework  of  philo- 
sophical speculation.  With  such  a  start  as  he  had 
had  in  the  way  of  intellectual  convictions,  he  simply 
could  not  see  things  in  any  other  way.  And  many 
other  men  in  those  days  were  in  the  same  condition. 
An  Irenseus  or  a  Tertullian  might  have  been  unable 
to  win  them  to  see  that  Christianity  was  true.  Clem- 
ent taught  the  same  faith  and  the  same  traditions, 
but  he  showed  how  they  could  be  harmonized  with 
what  we  may  call  the  Alexandrine  forms  of  thought. 
III.  Origen.  When  Clement  left  Alexandria  in 
fear  of  persecution,  no  man  of  prominence  dared  to 
take  up  his  wrork.  His  most  zealous  and  gifted  pu- 
pil was  a  youth  not  yet  eighteen  years  old,  Origenes 
Adamantius,  known  to  us  as  Origen.  He  offered  to 
carry  on  the  school  for  a  time.  It  was  not  long  be- 
fore the  bishop  was  glad  to  appoint  him  formally  to 
be  its  head.  For,  indeed,  this  stripling  soon  began 
to  show  himself  a  giant.  None  could  take  the  full 
measure  of  the  man  till  his  long  life  was  over.  The 
student  of  to-day  looks  back  and  sees  in  him  the  one 
great,  commanding  figure,  incomparable  among  theo- 
logical teachers  as  a  power  whether  for  good  or  for 
evil,  between  St.  Paul,  nearly  two  centuries  earlier, 
and  St.  Augustine  of  Hippo,  nearly  two  centuries 
later.  His  only  rival  is  that  other  great  Alexan- 
drian, Athanasius,  and  even  Athanasius  did  not  af- 
fect Christianity  so  profoundly  as  did  he.  The  later 
Church  admired  its  martyr  Cyprian  much  more  gen- 
erally, and  was  much  more  in  sympathy  with  its 
scholar  Jerome,  but  that  very  Church  owed  most  to 
Origen,  whose  name  was  stricken  from  her  honor- 


OrigerCs   Character.  335 

roll  and  became  a  by -word  and  a  reproach.  To  ex- 
plain such  a  paradox  we  need  to  pass  in  review  his 
character,  his  opinions,  and  his  life. 

1.  Origen's  character  may  almost  be  summed 
up  in  a  single  phrase.  He  was  a  man  of  intense  de- 
votion. He  had  been  brought  up  to  it  from  child- 
hood. His  father,  Leonides,  was  a  Christian,  and 
one  of  those  who  see  things  invisible.  So  deep  was 
this  father's  sense  of  the  Divine  Indwelling  that  he 
used  sometimes  to  go  to  the  boy's  bedside,  as  he 
slept,  and  uncover  his  breast  and  kiss  it  reverently 
as  a  shrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God.  He  would 
have  his  boy  learn  all  that  belonged  to  the  highest 
education  of  the  day,  including  Christian  teaching, 
of  course,  and  when  the  child  began  to  ask  questions 
too  deep  for  his  teachers  to  answer,  the  father 
warned  him  against  the  dangers  of  an  un reverent 
haste  to  search  into  mysteries,  but  inwardly  gave 
thanks  for  such  a  son.  In  the  persecution  of  the 
year  202,  Leonides  fell  a  victim  cheerfully,  and  his 
son,  like-minded,  wrote  to  him  in  his  prison  to  beg 
him  not  to  be  weakened  by  thoughts  of  those  at 
home.  Nay,  the  young  man  longed  for  a  martyr's 
death,  and  would  once  have  gone  to  seek  it,  but  that 
his  mother  hid  his  clothes  to  make  it  impossible. 
Thwarted  in  that  direction,  he  took  up  the  work  of 
teaching  the  Catechetical  School,  hoping  to  come  thus 
to  his  crown.  The  authorities  shifted  the  school  from 
lodging  to  lodging  for  safety,  but  the  young  teacher 
exposed  himself  with  reckless  courage,  visiting  the 
martyrs  in  prison,  attending  them  when  they  went 
to    death,  and  once,  we   are  told,  preaching  Christ 


336  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

from  the  steps  of  the  Temple  of  Serapis,  the  very 
centre  and  citadel  of  Alexandrian  heathenism,  to  an 
angry  mob.  A  mysterious  providence  delivered  him 
again  and  again,  and  he  saw  himself  called  to  serve 
by  life  rather  than  by  death. 

His  intensity  could  bear  the  harder  test  of  living. 
The  family  propert}^  had  been  confiscated.  Origen 
became  for  a  time  the  protege  of  a  wealthy  woman 
who  dangled  between  the  Catholic  Church  and  one 
of  the  Gnostic  sects.  Nothing  would  induce  Origen 
to  attend  services  or  preachings  of  a  Gnostic  teacher 
whom  she  was  also  supporting.  Indeed,  such  a  de- 
pendence could  not  continue  long,  and  we  presently 
find  the  young  scholar  parting  with  the  library 
which  he  had  gathered  when  he  was  a  rich  man's 
son, — we  must  remember  that  "library"  in  those 
days  meant  rolls  laboriously  copied  by  hand,  and 
therefore  costly  beyond  our  common  thought, — for 
an  annuity  which  was  to  yield  four  oboli  (say  fourteen 
cents)  a  day.  It  was  the  barest  pittance,  less  than  a 
laborer's  wage,  but  Origen  asked  no  more.  For 
years  he  lived  on  that  allowance  and  refused  the 
gifts  that  friends  longed  to  bestow  on  him.  He 
wore  no  shoes,  and  but  a  single  garment,  for  had  not 
the  Apostles  been  sent  out  so  (St.  Matt.  x.  10)? 
His  food  and  sleep  were  limited  by  strict,  ascetic 
rules.  Nay,  the  spirit  of  utter  obedience  to  eveiy 
word  that  might  fall  from  the  Divine  Master  went 
so  far  with  him  that  having  pondered  deeply  the 
Lord's  words,  There  be  eunuchs  ivhicli  have  made  them- 
selves eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake,  he  re- 


Or -ig 'en's    Unsparing  Toil.  337 

ceived   that  hard  saying  as  touching  himself,   and 
made  it  literally  true. 

This  great  soul  was  intense  in  toil  also.  A  cen- 
tury after  his  death,  it  was  reported  of  him  that  he 
had  written  6,000  books.  Jerome  thought  2,000  more 
likely.  The  number  need  not  concern  us.  Plainly 
the  impression  made  upon  contemporaries  was  an 
impression  of  enormous  labor  and  enormous  produc- 
tive power.  There  were  few  books  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture which  this  indefatigable  scholar  did  not  cover 
with  "commentaries,"  or  with  "homilies," — simple 
expository  sermons,  explaining  a  book  verse  by 
verse, — and  he  treated  some  books  of  Scripture  in 
both  ways.  Again  Origen  found  himself  hin- 
dered in  controversy  by  ignorance  of  the  language 
of  the  Old  Testament.  "It  does  not  read  so  in  the 
Hebrew,"  men  would  say  to  him.  Then  he  under- 
took the  study  of  Hebrew  himself,  and  in  a  few 
months  he  was  able  to  read  the  Old  Testament  in 
the  original,  enough  at  least  to  be  able  to  compare  it 
intelligently  with  the  versions  which  he  found  in 
use.1  The  study  of  Hebrew  was  as  rare  then  among 
Christian  scholars,  as  that  of  Assyrian  is  now.  With 
Origen  it  was  but  the  first  step  toward  another,  and 
a  huge  undertaking.  He  determined  to  give  the 
Church   an   edition   of  the    Old   Testament   which 

1  St.  Jerome,  writing  a  letter  of  condolence  to  a  friend  on  her 
daughter's  death,  compares  the  deceased  lady  to  Origen  because 
she  learned  Hebrew  in  so  short  a  time.  He  adds  that  she  vied 
with  her  mother  in  singing  the  Psalms  in  Hebrew.  The  writer  of 
the  article  Origenes  in  the  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography  re- 
fers to  this  letter  as  proving  that  Origen  and  his  mother  sang  He- 
brew Psalms,  and  hints  that  the  mother  may  have  been  a  Jewess  ! 
It  is  a  small  oversight  of  a  great  man. 

V 


338  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

should  contain  in  six  parallel  columns,  first  the  He- 
brew Text,  then  the  same  syllables  written  in  Greek 
characters,  then  in  the  remaining  four  columns  the 
Greek  Versions  of  Symmachus,  Aquila,  the  LXX., 
and  Theodotion.  This  six -column  work  was  known 
as  the  Hexapla.1  It  was  the  first  large  attempt  to 
distinguish  between  what  did  truly  represent  the 
Word  of  God,  and  what  did  not,  and  it  was  a  labor 
of  years,  labor  the  most  toilsome.  It  belongs  to  the 
same  subject  that  after  Celsus,  a  heathen  philoso- 
pher, the  Voltaire  of  the  second  century,  had  as- 
sailed the  Christian  religion  with  one  of  the  keenest, 
as  well  as  bitterest,  criticisms  it  ever  suffered,  it  was 
the  busy  Origen,  the  most  overworked  scholar  of 
his  day,  who  furnished  in  his  eight  books  Contra 
Celsum  the  answer  by  which  the  Church  was  willing 
to  be  judged. 

Origen  appears,  then,  as  a  man  of  high  ambitions 
and  of  great  accomplishment.  All  this  he  might 
have  been,  and  withal  a  man  of  small  and  mean  na- 
ture, gaining  force,  like  a  mountain  stream,  by  con- 
centrating all  his  energies  into  one  narrow  channel. 
It  remains  to  say  that  Origen  was  the  reverse  of  all 
that.  He  was  intense,  but  he  was  broad  and  gener- 
ous. One  sees  it  in  his  friendships.  The  narrow 
man,  who  makes  his  soul  as  a  wedge,  is  apt  to  cleave 
his  way  through  obstacles,   but  he  does  not  bind 

1  Another  edition,  in  four  columns,  with  the  four  Greek  Versions 
only,  had  the  name  of  the  Tetrapla,  and  the  Hexapla  itself  had  ad- 
ditional columns  for  some  books,  containing  a  fifth,  a  sixth,  and 
in  the  case  of  the  Psalms  even  a  seventh,  version.  Where  the  col- 
umns numbered  eight,  the  edition  was  sometimes  referred  to  as 
the  Octapla. 


Oriyeii's  Friendships.  339 

hearts.  He  accomplishes  results,  but  he  does  not 
make  friends.  Origen  won  people  wherever  he 
went.  He  got  a  reputation  as  a  man  who  could  un- 
derstand other  men,  and  as  one  to  whom  it  was 
worth  while  to  carry  the  questions  of  the  soul.  The 
governor  of  Arabia  sends  for  him  to  give  him  spir- 
itual help.  Twice  in  his  later  life  he  is  called  to 
that  same  province  to  quiet  troubled  souls  in  times 
of  controversy,  and  not  only  that,  but  by  his  kindly 
fashion  of  entering  into  other  men's  minds  he  ac- 
tually succeeds  in  bringing  the  adopters  of  some 
curious  new  notions  back  into  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  The  emperor  Philip  the  Arabian  had 
some  correspondence  with  him,  and  years  earlier, 
Julia  Mamsea,  aunt  of  Elagabalus,  the  reigning,  and 
mother  of  Alexander  Severus,  the  coming,  emperor, 
had  sent  a  guard  of  honor  to  bring  this  famous 
teacher  to  an  interview  with  her  at  Antioch.  Am- 
brose, a  wealthy  citizen  of  Alexandria,  is  converted 
from  a  Gnostic  heresy  by  him,  and  becomes  his  life- 
long friend,  devoting  his  riches  largely  to  the  service 
of  this  benefactor  of  his  soul,  and  as  his  friend  will 
take  nothing  for  himself,  covering  all  the  expense  of 
providing  amanuenses  for  him  to  take  his  dictations, 
and  professional  copyists  to  write  out  fair  the  fin- 
ished work,  that  Hexapla  and  Tetrapla  and  com- 
mentaries may  be  given  to  the  world.  Never  was 
there  a  leader  of  thought  who  had  a  more  devoted 
personal  following  than  Origen.  His  effect  upon 
his  pupils  is  described  by  one  of  the  greatest  of  them, 
Gregory,  who  afterward  as  bishop  of  Neo-Csesarea  in 
Pontus    was    to    win    the    title    of    Thaumaturgus, 


340  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

"  Wonder-worker.''  Gregory  was  on  his  way  to 
Berytus  to  study  law,  when  by  a  good  providence 
he  visited  the  Palestinian  Csesarea,  and  heard 
Origen  lecturing  there.  "  It  was  as  if  a  spark  fell 
into  my  soul,  and  caught  fire,  and  blazed  up,"  he 
says,  "  such  was  my  love  for  the  Holy  Word,  and  for 
this  man,  its  friend  and  advocate.  Stung  by  this 
desire,  I  forgot  all  that  seemed  to  touch  me  most 
nearly, — my  studies,  even  my  beloved  jurisprudence, 
my  country,  my  relatives,  my  present  mission,  even 
the  object  of  my  travels."  At  Origen's  magic  touch 
the  whole  world  appeared  to  him  in  a  new  light,  and 
the  man  who  had  wrought  this  miracle  upon  him 
Gregory  must  love  and  reverence  all  his  days. 
That  is  but  one  example  of  what  Origen  was  as  an 
inspirer.  There  cannot  be  a  perfect  love,  it  is  true, 
without  a  right  faith  to  guide  the  eyes  of  the  heart. 
But  faith  itself  exists  for  the  sake  of  love,  and  only 
for  the  sake  of  love.  Origen  had  that  kind  of  de- 
votion in  him  that  can  lead  men  not  only  to  faith, 
the  means,  but  even  to  love,  the  end. 

2.  To  give  a  summary  of  the  opinions  of  so  vo- 
luminous a  writer  as  Origen  would  be  too  much  like 
undertaking  an  analysis  of  an  encyclopedia,  but  as  it 
was  his  fate  not  only  to  set  men  thinking  more  ac- 
tively than  any  other  teacher  had  done  for  generations, 
but  also  to  divide  them  profoundly  and  draw  down 
lightnings  of  condemnation  from  a  great  many  more 
or  less  "  celestial  minds,"  it  is  necessary  to  go  some- 
what into  the  matter  of  his  beliefs. 

First,  then,  he  was  just  as  much  a  "  Catholic," 
bound  in   his  conscience    to    a  "  Catholic  Church " 


Oriyen  a   Traditionalist.  341 

and  a  "  Catholic  Faith,"  as  Irena;us  and  Tertullian 
in  the  West.  The  modern  Protestant  position  of 
submitting  all  points  in  religion  to  the  decision  of 
private  judgment,  assisted  by  such  portions  of  Holy 
Scripture  as  may  commend  themselves  to  the  same 
judgment  as  probably  given  by  inspiration, — that 
position  would  have  seemed  to  Origen  simply  shock- 
ing. In  the  preface  to  his  book  on  First  Principles 
{Be  Principiis)  he  lays  it  down  that  %t  seeing  there  are 
many  who  think  they  hold  the  opinion  of  Christ, 
and  yet  some  of  these  think  differently  from  their 
predecessors,  yet  as  the  teaching  of  the  Church, 
transmitted  in  orderly  succession  from  the  Apostles, 
and  remaining  in  the  Churches  to  the  present  day, 
is  still  preserved,  that  alone  is  to  be  accepted  as 
truth  which  differs  in  no  respect  from  ecclesiastical 
and  Apostolic  tradition."  He  goes  on  to  give  a  long 
paraphrase  of  the  Creed,  to  show  what  points  are  in- 
cluded in  this  binding  tradition.  He  mentions  also 
from  time  to  time  subjects  which  are  not  included 
in  this  body  of  revealed  truths,  and  which  are  open 
to  the  Christian  student  to  speculate  upon  as  he 
may.  But  even  in  pointing  out  the  open  fields  of 
the  Church's  free  theology,  he  makes  it  plain  that  he 
holds  as  steadfastly  as  any  other  traditionalist  to  the 
existence  of  a  central  ground  of  faith,  fenced  round 
by  boundaries  which  it  is  a  matter  of  conscience  to 
keep  unmoved. 

So  in  his  sacramental  and  sacerdotal  ideas  Origen 
was  entirely  in  harmony  with  the  general  mind  of 
the  Church.  Original  sin  finds  its  remedy  in  the 
offer  of   baptismal  regeneration.     The    Church,  he 


342  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

says,  baptizes  infants,  according  to  the  tradition  re- 
ceived from  the  Apostles.  "  If  there  were  nothing 
in  little  children  to  call  for  remission  and  indulgence, 
the  grace  of  baptism  would  seem  superfluous" 
{Com.  on  Romans  v.  9,  on  Leviticus  viii.  3).  As  to  the 
Eucharist,  Origen  feels  deeply  that  the  flesh  profiteth 
nothing,  even  though  it  be  the  flesh  of  our  Lord,  un- 
less the  Word  and  Spirit  operate  savingly  upon  the 
soul,  and  so  he  says  sometimes  that  the  real  Body 
and  Blood  of  the  Sacrament  are  the  Word  that 
nourishes,  and  the  Word  that  makes  glad  the  heart 
(Com.  Ser.  on  St.  Matt.  85).  Yet  he  certainly  holds 
the  common  belief  of  the  Church,  that  the  conse- 
crated elements  become  a  Power  in  themselves.  We 
eat  "  bread  which  by  prayer  is  made  a  Body  most 
holy  and  sanctifying  those  who  with  right  purpose 
use  it"  (Contra  Celsum  viii.  33).  Nay,  he  that  re- 
ceiveth  unworthily,  "  eateth  and  drinketh  damnation  to 
himself,  one  and  the  same  excellent  Power  in  the 
Bread  and  in  the  Cup  inworking  good  in  a  good 
disposition  which  receives  it,  and  implanting  judg- 
ment in  the  evil.  So  the  sop  from  Jesus  was  of  like 
nature  with  that  which  was  given  to  the  rest  of  the 
Apostles  with  the  words,  Take,  eat,  but  to  the  one  for 
salvation,  to  Judas  for  judgment,  since  after  the  sop 
Satan  entered  into  him.  Let  the  Bread  and  the  Cup 
be  considered  by  the  more  simple  according  to  the 
more  common  interpretation  of  the  Eucharist,  by 
those  who  have  learned  to  hear  deeper  meanings,  ac- 
cording to  the  more  divine  promise  also,  concerning 
the  nourishing  Word  of  Truth  "  (Com.  on  St.  John 
xxxii.  16).     It  is  to  be  observed  that  Origen's  deeper 


Origen  both  Allegorical  and  Literal.  343 

meaning  does  not  contradict  at  all  "the  more  common 
interpretation."  The  common  mind  was  content  to 
know  that  it  was  receiving  the  Lord's  Body.  Origen 
longs  to  study  the  nature  of  that  mysterious  spirit- 
ual gain  to  which  even  this  supernatural  Commun- 
ion is  but  a  step.  But  that  he  does  not  use  sacra- 
mental language  merely  figuratively  is  plain  from 
his  ascribing  the  reception  of  the  Lord's  Body  to 
unworthy  communicants  as  well  as  to  the  devout, 
and  from  such  a  passage  as  this :  "  Aforetime,  in 
similitude,  was  a  baptism  in  the  cloud  and  in  the 
sea ;  now,  in  reality,  is  Regeneration  in  water  and 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Then,  in  similitude,  was  manna 
food ;  now,  in  reality,  is  the  Flesh  of  the  Word  of 
God  true  food,  as  He  Himself  also  saith,  My  Flesh  is 
meat  indeed,  and  My  Blood  is  drink  indeed  "  {Horn,  on 
Numbers  vii.  2).  To  Origen's  mind  the  Eucharistic 
Elements  were  in  some  quite  literal  sense  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ,  but  every  material  fact  in  the 
world,  even  the  Body  of  the  Lord  Himself,  was  also 
a  symbol  of  some  spiritual  idea.  In  like  manner 
Origen  treats  our  Lord's  return  to  judgment  as  if  it 
were  a  pure  allegory  of  His  revelation  of  Himself 
to  souls,  yet  he  also  says  that  he  does  not  refuse  to 
believe  in  "  the  Second  Visitation  of  the  Son  of  God 
as  more  simply  understood"  (On  St.  Matt.  xii.  30). 

In  regard  to  Holy  Scripture  Origen  believed  im- 
plicitly in  an  inspiration  which  made  every  word  and 
syllable  precious.  It  is  part  of  the  necessary  tradi- 
tion, he  tells  us  in  the  preface  to  the  Be  Principiis, 
"  that  the  Scriptures  were  written  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  and  have  a  meaning  not  only  such  as  is  appar- 


344  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

ent  at  first  sight,  but  also  another  which  escapes  the 
notice  of  most."  He  held  that  there  were  three 
meanings,  the  literal,  the  moral,  and  the  spiritual, 
the  moral  teaching  human  duty,  and  the  spiritual  the 
mysteries  of  redemption.  The  three  corresponded 
to  the  body,  soul,  and  spirit  in  man.  But  there  were 
cases,  Origen  thought,  where  the  literal  meaning 
was  not  meant  to  be  received  at  all.  Satan  convey- 
ing our  Lord  to  a  pinnacle  of  the  Temple,  or  show- 
ing Him  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  from  a  single 
mountain  top,  was  an  example  of  natural  impossi- 
bility. The  extermination  of  hostile  peoples  by  the 
Jews,  the  law  of  visiting  the  fathers'  sins  upon  the 
children,  the  curses  of  the  imprecatory  Psalms, — 
these  were  examples  of  moral  impossibility.  The 
literal  meaning  was  to  be  disregarded  save  as  a  help  to 
finding  the  higher  meanings.  The  danger  of  such  a 
method  is  obvious.  It  encouraged  men  to  explain 
away  God's  utterance  instead  of  submitting  to  it. 
On  the  other  hand,  Origen  did  much  to  keep  the 
Old  Testament  in  use,  when  it  was  in  danger,  as  it  is 
to-day,  of  popular  rejection.  If  his  rejection  of  the 
letter  was  an  unfortunate  mistake,  his  claim  that  men 
could  discover  a  higher  meaning  taught  them  to  find 
a  golden  glow  of  spiritual  suggestion  in  every  por- 
tion of  the  Word. 

In  dealing  with  the  Old  Testament  Origen  made 
one  strange  slip.  He  read  it  in  the  LXX.  Greek,  and 
found  there  considerable  additions  to  the  books  of 
Daniel  and  Esther,  and  whole  books  besides, — Tobit, 
Ecclesiasticus,  Maccabees, — which  were  not  in  any 
Hebrew  Bible.     Unhappily,  Origen  got  it  into  his 


The  Phrase,  "Eternal  Generation."  345 

head  that  this  was  a  case  of  the  "  Bible  of  the  Jews" 
against  the  "  Bible  of  the  Church."  God  could  not 
have  allowed  the  Church  to  adopt  a  version  of  the 
Scriptures  containing  a  large  portion  of  apocryphal, 
uninspired  additions.  An  older  scholar,  Julius 
Africanus,  pointed  out  to  him  that  the  Story  of  Su- 
sannah, in  the  Greek  Daniel,  was  improbable  in  it- 
self, and  contained  plays  upon  words  which  must 
have  been  written  in  the  Greek  tongue,  and  could 
not  possibly  have  had  any  Hebrew  original.  Where 
Origen  insisted  that  God  could  not  let  the  Church 
make  a  mistake  as  to  what  belonged  in  its  Bible, 
Julius  held  that  God  had  seen  the  Church  falling 
into  such  a  blunder,  and  was  now  sending  through 
scholarship  the  means  of  correcting  it.  But  Origen 
could  not  see,  and  his  view,  so  unworthy  of  him,  was 
for  once  a  really  popular  one,  men  were  so  carried 
away  by  that  question-begging  watchword,  "  the 
Bible  of  the  Church." 

As  regards  the  Being  of  God,  Origen  held  de- 
voutly the  Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  but  his 
profound  and  active  mind  brought  out  with  new 
clearness  what  that  doctrine  really  contained.  The 
Church  owes  to  him  the  phrase  "  eternal  generation," 
w^hich  safeguards  our  doctrine  in  two  opposite  direc- 
tions. As  against  the  Sabellian  idea  that  "  Son  "  is 
but  a  name  for  an  occasional  manifestation  of  the 
Father,  like  the  flame  that  leaps  up  from  the  fire  and 
presently  sinks  back,  this  phrase,  u  eternal  genera- 
tion," declares  that  the  Son  is  always  Son.  His  dis- 
tinction is  a  permanent  distinction  in  the  Godhead. 
On  the  other  hand,  as  against  the  danger  of  dividing 


346  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  Substance  and  making  in  effect  three  Gods  rather 
than  three  Divine  Persons  in  one  Godhead,  this  same 
careful  phrase  holds  up  the  thought  that  the  Father 
never  gives  Deity  to  Son  or  Spirit  in  such  wise  as  to 
give  it  away.  The  personal  distinctions  exist  from 
eternity,  but  they  are  the  gift  of  the  Father  by  an 
eternal  act  of  giving.1  Hence  Origen  was  content 
to  take  our  Lord's  words,  The  Father  is  greater  than 
I  (St.  John  xiv.  28),  as  referring  to  His  Divine  Na- 
ture. So  the  greatest  of  the  Church's  theologians 
have  generally  taken  it, — as  for  example  Athanasius 
and  Basil  in  the  East  and  Augustine  in  the  West, — 
but  fear  of  seeming  to  make  our  Lord  less  than  per- 
fect in  His  Divinity  has  made  the  majority  of  com- 
mentators to  take  a  feeble  refuge  in  the  explanation 
that  our  Lord  was  speaking  as  Man.  They  have 
been  afraid  to  acknowledge  anything  that  could  be 
called  "subordination"  in  the  relations  of  the  Di- 
vine Persons. 

Origen  has  also  the  honor  of  being  the  first  to  call 
our  Lord  "  the  God-Man,"  a  most  useful  and  telling 
phrase  in  which  to  sum  up  the  doctrine  of  His  single 
Personality  and  His  two  Natures,  indissolubly,  yet 
inconfusedly  conjoined.  Yet  again,  as  by  his  "  sub- 
ordinationism,"  he  laid  himself  open  to  attack  from 
critics  not  generous  enough  to  take  the  trouble  to  be 
fair,  by  asserting  that  while  prayer  might  fitly  be  ad- 
dressed to  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  yet  prayer  in  the 

1  In  the  same  spirit  Origen  coined  another  phrase,  -which  was  to 
become  famous  in  the  Arian  controversy.  "There  was  not  when 
He  was  not,"  he  said  of  the  Divine  Son.  He  was  not  satisfied  to 
say,  "There  was  no  time  when  He  was  not."  The  eternity  of 
God  surpasses  the  bounds  of  time. 


Origerfs  Doctrine  of  Man.  347 

very  highest  form  could  be  offered  only  through  Christ 
to  the  Father.  It  was  the  glory  of  the  Son  that  He 
could  do  nothing  of  Himself  (St.  John  v.  19),  that  His 
Will  was  the  loving  copy  of  His  Father's  Will.  To 
assert  that  that  prayer  soars  highest  which  addresses 
itself  in  form  to  the  Will  which  is  eternally  the 
model  of  all  good  will,  rather  than  to  the  Will  which 
eternally  agrees  therewith,  is  a  highly  metaphysical 
distinction,  but  it  has  its  value,  being  a  true  distinc- 
tion. In  fact,  the  Church's  highest  offering  of  devo- 
tion is  the  Holy  Eucharist,  and  that  is  essentially  an 
offering  to  the  Father  through  the  Son. 

But  while  critics  sometimes  faulted  Origen's  doc- 
trine of  God,  the  great  cause  of  Christian  animosity 
against  him  was  found  in  his  doctrine  of  man.  In 
the  controversy  about  the  forgiveness  of  post-bap- 
tismal sin  he  began  with  severe  views,  but  in  later 
life  he  came  to  the  opinion  that  any  sin  might  have 
forgiveness  in  this  life,  save  only  the  sin  of  stubborn 
impenitence.  His  mature  conviction  was  one  of  his 
departures  from  the  prevailing  theology  of  the  gen- 
eration before  him,  but  the  general  mind  of  the 
Church  changed  in  the  same  -direction,  and  his  repu- 
tation did  not  greatly  suffer.  The  same  turn  of 
mind,  however,  which  led  Origen  to  insist  that  God 
must  be  ready  to  forgive  at  any  time  any  sin  except 
final  impenitence,  led  him  to  two  other  teachings 
which  the  Church  generally  was  inclined  to  resent. 
A  chivalrous  soul  himself,  he  longed  to  make  men 
feel  that  Almighty  God  was  not  what  in  a  man 
would  be  called  mean.  Of  course,  such  an  endeavor 
has  its  dangers  too.     We  cannot  measure  the  justice 


348  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

• 
of  God's  providences  without  knowing  all  the  facts, 

and  to  get  all  the  facts  before  us,  while  we  are  in  this 
life,  at  any  rate,  is  obviously  impossible.  But  men 
find  it  hard  not  to  judge  of  what  they  cannot  see,  by 
what  they  see,  and  two  things  in  the  present  appear- 
ances of  human  life  pressed  heavily  on  Origen's 
warm  heart.  Men  did  not  seem  to  have  equal 
chances  of  salvation  in  this  life,  and  in  the  other  life, 
according  to  the  commonly  received  opinion,  infinite 
punishment  was  to  be  the  penalty  of  finite  sin.  An 
appearance  of  unfairness  seemed  to  hang  over  man's 
origin  and  over  his  end.  The  bold  thinker  found  an 
answer  for  both  difficulties.  He  became  convinced 
that  human  souls  must  have  had  a  former  existence, 
in  which  they  all  started  fair,  every  one  perfect  in  its 
measure,  and  all  equal  in  their  opportunities.  Some 
fell  from  grace,  and  life  in  this  world's  various  con- 
ditions is  the  just  punishment  of  such  souls,  varying 
according  to  the  depth  of  their  fall.  The  Greek 
word  for  "  soul "  is  connected  with  the  word  which 
stands  for  "  breathing,"  and  so  for  "  cooling."  Origen 
seized  on  this  derivation  as  a  support  for  his  view. 
A  soul  was  a  thing  cooled  off,  a  spiritual  power 
which  had  lost  the  fire  of  its  first  love.1  But  having 
made  of  this  world  a  sort  of  disciplinary  hell,  into 
which  no  soul  but  the  Saviour's  ever  entered  but  for 
its  sins,  Origen  looked  forward  also  to  that  other 
hell,  of  which  our  Lord  warned  men  so  solemnly, 
and  suggested  that  that  must  be  a  further  place  of 
punishment  and  probation  for  souls  that  the  disci- 

!It  should  be  said  for  him,  in  passing,  that  he  did  not  ascribe 
such  an  origin  to  the  human  soul  of  our  Lord. 


Origerfs  Personal  History.  349 

pline  of  this  world  could  not  correct.  He  seems  to 
have  wavered  in  his  optimism,  sometimes  suggesting 
that  God  must  ultimately  succeed  in  saving  every 
spiritual  force  to  goodness,  at  other  times  declaring 
quite  positively  that  the  case  of  Satan  and  his  evil 
spirits  is  hopeless.  But  at  least  he  inclined  strongly 
to  the  idea  that  all  punishment  was  in  the  divine 
purpose  corrective  and  remedial,  that  the  great  say- 
ing, I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all 
men  unto  Me,  was  simply  and  literally  true,  and  that 
the  time  would  come  when  God's  Kingdom  would 
no  longer  be  divided  by  the  presence  of  evil  will. 

3.  The  career  of  a  great  scholar  is  apt  to  be  un- 
eventful, unless  he  is  charged  with  heresy.  Origen 
began  his  work  as  a  boy  of  eighteen  under  a  storm 
of  persecution,  in  an  atmosphere  of  martyrdoms  of 
pupils  and  near  friends  and  of  narrow  escapes  for 
himself,  but  the  storm  blew  over,  and  until  he 
reaches  the  age  of  thirty-one,  we  may  think  of  him 
as  leading  a  life  of  quiet  usefulness.  He  is  not  yet 
a  writer.  He  is  settling  his  own  mind  and  forming 
the  views  which  he  is  to  give  to  the  world  by  and  by. 
We  find  him  attending  the  school  of  a  heathen 
teacher  of  philosophy,  Ammonius  Saccas,  to  the 
scandal  of  some  of  the  brethren,  but  his  defence 
seems  reasonable.  He  needs  to  know  what  men  are 
saying  whom  in  his  own  school  he  is  constantly 
called  upon  to  answer.  Other  Christian  teachers,  he 
says,  have  done  so  before.  In  the  same  spirit  of  de- 
sire to  know  what  men  are  thinking,  he  takes  a  holi- 
day visit  to  the  most  ancient  Church  of  the  Romans, 
where   he  meets   the  bishop   Zephyrinus    and    that 


350  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

hard-tempered  scholar,  Hippolytus,  but  if  his  visit 
enriched  or  cleared  his  mind  particularly,  we  have  no 
trace  of  it.  In  the  year  216  there  was  a  change. 
Alexandrian  wit  had  launched  poisoned  shafts  at  the 
emperor  Caracalla,  who  had  murdered  his  own 
brother  to  secure  his  throne  and  bought  with  heavy 
bribe  the  support  of  the  Praetorian  Guards.  The 
emperor  met  the  sarcasm  of  the  university  wits  with 
a  horrible  massacre,  long  remembered  as  the  "  frenzy 
of  Caracalla,"  in  which  all  noted  scholars  were 
marked  out  to  be  chief  victims.  There  was  no  prin- 
ciple that  required  Origen  to  meet  death  in  such  a 
cause,  and  his  friends  persuaded  him  to  seek  refuge 
in  some  foreign  city.  It  was  a  turning-point  of  his 
life,  when  he  chose  the  Palestinian  Csesarea. 

Of  the  Christian  history  of  Palestine  in  the  pre- 
ceding century  little  is  known.  Fifteen  bishops,  be- 
ginning with  James  the  Lord's  brother,  had  held  the 
see  of  Jerusalem  before  the  destruction  under  Ha- 
drian. Fifteen  more  had  ministered  to  an  exclusively 
Gentile  population  in  the  new  city  of  iElia  Capito- 
lina.  A  succession  so  rapid  gave  little  opportunity 
for  most  of  the  bishops  to  make  a  mark  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  see,  and  it  would  seem  to  have  been  for 
long  a  post  of  danger  and  of  shortened  life.  The 
fifteenth  bishop  of  the  Gentile  line,  Narcissus,  is  an 
exception.  Born  before  the  death  of  St.  John  the 
Evangelist,  he  was  one  hundred  and  sixteen  years 
old  when  a  certain  letter  was  written  by  his  coad- 
jutor Alexander  between  212  and  216,  and  he  had 
passed  away  before  Origen  came  in  the  latter 
year  to  Palestine.     By  his  great  age  he  is  made  a 


Narcissus  of  Jerusalem.  351 

valuable  witness  to  the  continuity  of  Christian 
thought  in  Palestine.  A  Gentile  Christian  himself, 
he  had  still  come  to  mature  years  before  the  extinc- 
tion of  the  original  Church  of  Jerusalem.  It  is  clear 
that  a  very  small  interval  separated  him  from  the 
teachings  of  the  last  of  the  original  Apostles,  and  if 
we  may  assure  ourselves  that  his  early  traditions 
were  sound  ones,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  his 
turn  he  taught  them  with  power. 

For  a  man  of  power  he  plainly  was.  The  name 
of  Narcissus  is  one  of  those  around  which  marvels 
spring  and  grow.  In  the  days  of  Eusebius  men  told 
many  stories  of  miracles  that  he  had  done.  Thus 
they  said  that  once  when  the  Church  was  keeping 
vigil  on  the  night  before  Easter,  the  neglected  lamps 
began  to  go  out  for  want  of  oil,  and  oil  was  lacking 
in  the  sacristan's  stores.  Narcissus  bade  the  attend- 
ants fill  the  lamps  with  water,  and  they  burned  all 
night  without  fail.  Some  of  the  oil  thus  made  by 
miracle  was  shown  to  Eusebius,  but  that  cautious 
historian  will  not  go  beyond  "  They  tell  the  story." 
Another  "  stoiy,"  which  he  repeats  in  the  same  way, 
tells  how  an  atrocious  calumny  was  concocted  to 
blast  the  bishop's  reputation.  Three  men  swore  to 
the  slander,  and  invoked  various  horrors  upon  them- 
selves, if  it  was  not  true.  Believers  implored  the 
bishop  to  pay  no  heed  to  the  charge,  but  he  laid 
down  his  pastoral  staff,  and  disappeared.  He  had 
long  lived  an  ascetic  life,  and  now  he  went  into  the 
wilderness  and  lived  as  a  solitary.  Another  bishop 
was  consecrated  in  his  place,  and  after  him  another, 
and  again  another.     Meanwhile  the  first  of  the  ac- 


352  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

cusers  had  lost  his  life  in  a  burning  house,  the  second 
had  been  smitten  with  a  foul  disease,  and  the  third 
broke  down  and  confessed  the  horrible  conspiracy, 
bitterly  repenting  and  weeping  till  he  brought  blind- 
ness upon  himself,  and  all  the  imprecations  of  the 
false  swearers  were  fulfilled.  Then,  the  story  says, 
Narcissus  came  back  to  Jerusalem,  like  one  risen 
from  the  dead,  and  resumed  his  episcopal  throne. 
Outliving  Gordius,  the  last  of  the  three  bishops  who 
had  been  successively  appointed  in  his  place,  he 
found  himself  too  feeble  to  administer  his  diocese 
alone,  and  so  he  asked  for  a  coadjutor.1  It  was 
shown  to  some  of  the  chief  men  of  the  Church  in 
vision  that  on  a  certain  morning  they  should  find  him 
whom  God  had  sent  to  be  their  bishop  entering  at 
the  city  gate.  They  went  thither  and  welcomed 
Alexander,  a  Cappadocian  bishop,  come  on  pilgrim- 
age to  the  holy  places. 

Here  arose  a  double  difficulty.  It  was  contrary  to 
the  usual  order  of  the  Church  to  have  two  bishops 
in  one  city,  or  to  translate  a  bishop  from  the  see  for 
which  he  was  consecrated  to  another.  Thus  far  the 
Churches  had  been  governed  much  more  by  recog- 
nized principles  hardening  into  usage  than  b}^  any 
written  law.  But  both  these  things  were  felt  to  be 
contrary  to  the  Church's  mind,  and  both  were  in 
later  times  forbidden  by  stringent  regulations.  But 
under  the  commanding  influence  of  Narcissus  both 

'This  is  the  first  example  of  coadjutorship  that  we  find  in 
early  records,  from  the  time  that  the  Church  adopted  the  method 
of  assigning  a  particular  district  to  a  particular  bishop  as  its 
head.  The  case  of  Hippolytus  at  Rome  is  probably  a  still  earlier 
example  of  the  same  thing,  but  we  have  no  record  of  it  as  such. 


Origerfs  First  Stay  in   Csesarea.  353 

were  done,  and  Alexander,  "  with  the  unanimous 
consent  of  the  bishops  of  the  neighboring  Churches," 
became  coadjutor  bishop  of  Jerusalem.  It  would 
appear,  then,  that  in  216  the  Churches  of  Palestine 
were  held  specially  close  to  a  conservative  tradition 
about  the  essentials  of  the  faith  by  the  teaching  of 
such  a  remarkable  witness  as  Narcissus,  just  now 
passed  away,  and  that  in  practical  matters,  on  the 
other  hand,  they  were  singularly  given  to  broad 
views.  A  precedent  had  no  terrors  for  them,  if  the 
reason  for  it  did  not  happen  to  exist  in  a  particular 
case.  They  were  ready  to  give  the  Church  what  it 
needed,  even  if  it  needed  something  new. 

To  such  a  region  came  Origen.  Alexander  of 
Jerusalem  had  been  a  pupil  of  Pantsenus  and  Clem- 
ent, and  had  known  Origen,  and  loved  him,  in  his 
enthusiastic  boyhood.  He  delighted  in  him  now  in 
his  maturity,  and  gave  him  warm  commendation  to 
Theoctistus,  bishop  of  Caesarea.  Both  bishops  urged 
upon  Origen  that  he  ought  to  use  his  gifts  as  a 
preacher,  though  he  was  but  a  layman  still,  and  the 
modest  scholar  could  not  resist  so  weighty  a  pressure 
from  the  authorities  of  the  Church.  Three  years 
were  spent  here  in  much  preaching  and  teaching,  in- 
terrupted probably  in  218  by  the  visit  to  Julia 
Mamsea  (p.  339).  In  the  meantime  trouble  was 
preparing  at  Alexandria.  It  was  a  thing  unheard  of 
there  that  a  layman  should  expound  the  Scriptures 
in  time  of  service  in  presence  of  his  bishop.  Deme- 
trius was  scandalized,  and  wrote  to  complain.  He 
had  been  bishop  of  Alexandria  for  nearly  thirty 
years,  since  Origen  was  four,  and  to  the  old  bishop 
W 


354  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  young  lay-preacher  must  have  seemed  a  pre- 
sumptuous boy.  The  bishops  of  Csesarea  and  Jeru- 
salem defended  themselves  vigorously.  The  thing 
was  not  without  examples.  They  could  quote 
several  from  Asia  Minor.  They  had  no  doubt,  there 
were  many  more.  Demetrius  was  inexorable.  Origen 
was  an  official  of  the  Alexandrian  Church,  and  his 
bishop  formally  demanded  his  returning,  even  send- 
ing some  of  his  deacons  to  give  dignity  to  the  re- 
quisition. It  was  obeyed,  and  from  219  to  231 
Origen  was  once  more  the  head  of  the  Alexandrian 
School. 

His  life  in  Alexandria  at  this  period  was  in  two 
ways  different  from  what  it  had  been  before.  First, 
he  seems  to  have  begun  to  be  a  writer,  as  one  of  the 
chief  businesses  of  his  life.  Ambrose,  the  rich  con- 
vert, persuaded  his  friend  that  he  owed  the  Church 
this  kind  of  work,  and  put  at  his  disposal  the  costly 
means  of  doing  it  on  a  great  scale.  Secondly,  he 
began  to  be  made  unhappy  by  bitter  criticism.  He 
had  a  sensitive  soul,  and  in  the  preface  to  book  vi. 
of  his  Commentary  on  St.  John  he  compares  his 
final  departure  from  Egypt  to  Israel's  Exodus.  In 
231  the  trouble  came  to  a  head.  The  province  of 
Achaia  was  disturbed  by  heresies,  and  it  was  Origen 
who  was  called  in  to  quiet  the  strife.  Demetrius 
had  quite  confidence  enough  in  him  to  send  him  on 
such  an  errand,  and  with  no  fear,  apparently,  of  his 
adding  heresy  to  heresy,  gave  him  the  usual  letters 
commendatory,  which  a  Christian  was  expected  to 
be  able  to  show  when  he  was  away  from  home.    Ori- 


Origeri's   Ordination.  355 

gen  departed  by  way  of  Palestine,  and  took  that 
fatal  Caesarea  in  his  wajT.  Theoctistus  and  Alex- 
ander both  met  him  there,  and  persuaded  him  with 
urgent  entreaty  to  allow  himself  to  be  ordained  as  a 
presbyter  of  the  Church.  Technically  it  was  against 
the  Church's  common  order  that  a  self-mutilated 
man  should  be  admitted  to  the  ministry.  Techni- 
cally it  was  against  the  common  order  that  a  man  of 
one  " parish"  should  be  ordained  by  the  bishop  of 
another.  The  two  bishops  were  so  sure  that  this 
was  an  occasion  for  overriding  technicalities,  that 
they  did  an  unprecedented  thing.  They  ordained 
this  exceptional  candidate  by  their  joint  act,  uniting 
in  the  laying  on  of  hands  as  at  the  making  of  a 
bishop,  to  show  how  entirely  ready  both  felt  to  bear 
the  responsibility  for  this  decision  before  the  Church 
at  large. 

The  new  presbyter  went  on  his  way  to  Achaia. 
The  report  of  his  ordination  was  carried  back  to 
Alexandria,  and  at  once  there  was  a  storm.  Deme- 
trius and  other  leading  men  had  probably  regarded 
Origen's  views  as  not  technically  heretical,  while  yet 
considering  some  of  them  to  be  false  and  somewhat 
dangerous,  and  in  a  high  degree  offensive.  They 
were  in  no  mood  to  allow  technicalities  of  order  to 
be  set  aside  for  the  exaltation  of  such  a  teacher.  A 
council  of  bishops  and  a  few  presbyters  was  brought 
together,  and  it  was  decreed  that  Origen  was  to  be 
banished  from  Alexandria,  and  never  more  to  dwell 
or  teach  there.  Nor  was  this  enough  to  satisfy  the 
venerable  Demetrius  in  his  sense  of  outrage.     He  as- 


356  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

sembled  the  bishops,  his  colleagues,1  by  themselves, 
and  secured  from  them  a  vote  professing  to  depose 
the  offender  from  his  priesthood.  "  Demetrius  was 
so  wildly  enraged  at  him," — these  are  the  words  of 
such  a  pillar  of  orthodoxy  as  Jerome  {Be  Viris  Illus- 
tribus  liv.), — "that  he  wrote  everywhere  to  injure 
his  reputation."  "  What  reward  have  his  exertions 
brought  him?"  says  the  same  eloquent  advocate  {Let- 
ter xxxiii.).  "He  stands  condemned  by  his  bishop 
Demetrius,  only  the  bishops  of  Palestine,  Arabia, 
Phoenicia,  and  Achaia  dissenting.  Imperial  Rome 
consents  to  his  condemnation,  and  even  convenes  a 
senate  to  censure  him,  not — as  the  rabid  hounds  who 
now  pursue  him  cry — because  of  the  novelty  or 
heterodoxy  of  his  doctrines,  but  because  men  could 
not  tolerate  the  incomparable  eloquence  and  knowl- 
edge which,  when  once  he  opened  his  lips,  made 
others  seem  dumb." 

Jerome  changed  his  mind  in  after  life,  and  cen- 
sured some  of  Origen's  theology  very  severely.  It  is 
manifest,  however,  that  when  he  wrote  these  words 
he  did  not  regard  it  as  a  point  decided  by  the 
Church  that  any  opinion  of  Origen's  was  a  heresy. 
Either  the  Alexandrian  and  Roman  assemblies  had 
left  the  question  of  heresy  entirely  out  of  their  offi- 
cial pronouncements,  which  seems  probable,  or  else 
Jerome,  himself  a  hammer  of  heretics,  saw  reason  to 
regard  their  judgment  about  heresy  as  worthless. 

1  The  presence  of  bishops  in  Alexandria  at  this  time,  when  ac- 
cording to  one  authority  there  were  no  bishops  in  Egypt  outside 
of  Alexandria,  may  lend  force  to  the  suggestion  put  forth  on  p. 
72,  that  the  famous  "twelve  presbyters"  of  Alexandria  were 
really  bishops. 


Was   Origen   Condemned  as  a  Heretic?        357 

It  has  sometimes  been  claimed  by  modern  writers, 
as  by  Doctor  Pusey,  (  What  is  of  Faith  as  to  Ever- 
lasting Punishment?^),  that  Origen's  bold  question- 
ing whether  the  "  everlasting  punishment  "  of  Holy 
Scripture  necessarily  implies  endless  and  hopeless 
pain,  was  condemned  by  the  Fifth  General  Council 
(Constantinople  II.,  A.  D.  553).  The  anathemas  in 
which  that  doctrine  is  mentioned  are  the  work  of  the 
"  Home  Synod,"  a  local  body  of  no  particular  impor- 
tance, about  twelve  years  before.  Whether  Origen 
was  in  any  way  condemned  by  the  Fifth  General 
Council  is  an  open  question,  with  much  to  be  said 
on  either  side.  Canon  XI.  of  the  Council,  as  we 
now  read  it,  anathematizes  Origen  in  a  list  of  former 
heretics  (where  his  name  is  thrust  in  not  in  its  chro- 
nological order,  suggesting  the  work  of  an  interpola- 
tor), and  mentions  no  opinion  for  which  he  is  con- 
demned. The  utmost  that  can  be  made  out  is  that 
perhaps  the  bishops  in  that  gathering  thought  that 
something  which  they  supposed  Origen  to  have 
taught  was  heretical.  The  real,  living  Origen  was 
condemned  for  offences  against  ecclesiastical  order, 
and  possibly  for  some  of  his  opinions,  by  the 
Churches  of  Alexandria  and  Rome,  and  supported 
on  every  ground  by  all  the  more  eastern  Churches, 
from  Arabia  round  to  Greece.  Indeed,  he  had  sup- 
porters at  Alexandria  itself,  retaining  the  love  and 
confidence  of  both  Heraclas  and  Dionysius,  the  next 
two  bishops  of  that  see,  both  of  them  former  pupils 
of  his,  and  both  successors  to  him  in  the  headship  of 
the  school.  If  Origen  was  a  heretic,  he  was  a  here- 
tic with  the  best  part  of  the  Church  at  his  back. 


358  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Alexandria  thus  closed  against  him,1  in  spite  of 
his  strong  supporters  there,  Origen  returned  to  Cses- 
area,  and  made  that  city  his  chief  centre  for  the  rest 
of  his  life.  He  set  up  a  school  like  that  of  Alexan- 
dria, and  pupils  flocked  to  it.  There  is  a  story, 
likely  enough  to  be  true,  that  in  the  persecution  un- 
der Maximin,  235-238,  he  went  into  hiding  in  the 
Cappadocian  Csesarea,  whose  great  bishop,  Firmilian, 
was  an  old  pupil  and  warm  admirer.  Otherwise  his 
life  seems  to  have  flowed  very  quietly  on  for  twenty 
years.  It  is  noted,  curiously  enough,  that  it  was  only 
in  245,  when  he  had  reached  the  age  of  sixty,  that 
this  idolized  great  man  on  whose  words  men  hung, 
gained  courage  enough  about  his  unwritten  sermons 
to  give  his  consent  that  stenographers  should  report 
them.  Marvellous  is  the  modesty  of  greatness !  It 
may  be  noted  that  the  eight  books  Against  Celsus, 
who  had  written  ably  against  Christianity  some 
seventy-five  years  before,  seem  to  have  been  one  of 
the  last  works  of  Origen's  life. 

The  end  drew  on.  The  years  250-251  brought  a 
general  persecution.  While  Origen  had  work  to  do, 
he  had  been  wonderfully  preserved  from  such  dan- 
gers. Now  he  was  to  feel  the  discipline  of  pain  in 
the  torture  of  the  iron  chair  and  of  the  rack  stretched 
to  its  utmost  limit.  By  the  grace  of  God  he  lived 
true  to  his  name  of  Adamantius,  "  the  Indomitable," 
but  when  the  persecution  passed,  he  came  from  his 

JIf  the  student  reads  anywhere  the  common  statement  that 
Origen  went  to  Achaia  as  early  as  228,  and  returned  to  Alexan- 
dria before  the  decree  of  exile  was  pronounced  against  him,  he  is 
respectfully  referred  to  Doctor  McGiffert's  Eusebius,  pp.  395-7, 
where  he  will  find  the  matter  ably  argued. 


Origen's  Burial-place.  359 

prison  a  broken  man,  and  died  in  253,  in  his  sixty- 
ninth  year.  He  died  and  was  buried  at  Tyre,  per- 
haps the  scene  of  his  "  confession,"  and  when  in  later 
days  a  Cathedral  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  was 
built  there,  the  body  of  this  great  doctor  of  the 
Church  was  entombed  in  the  wall  back  of  the  high 
altar.  Even  at  this  day  the  Arab  dwellers  on  the 
site  show  a  stone-covered  vault  among  their  huts, 
and  say  that  "  Oriunus "  is  buried  there.  It  is  a 
meet  parable  of  the  persistence  of  some  of  his  lead- 
ing thoughts  amid  the  ruins  of  much  that  the  Church 
has  treasured  in  the  interval.  His  mistakes  were 
neither  few  nor  small.  They  that  love  him  best  will 
acknowledge  that.  But  it  may  be  claimed  that  for 
largeness  of  learning,  for  fruitful  energy  in  work,  for 
sweetness  of  character  in  the  loving  imitation  of 
Christ,  he  was  the  glory  of  the  Church  of  his  day. 
Feared  and  hated  as  he  certainly  was  by  many  of 
the  brethren,  he  made  the  Church  stronger  for  his 
life  in  it,  and  almost  every  great  man  in  the  Eastern 
Church  for  fifty  years  after  Origen's  death  was  either 
a  personal  pupil  of  that  great  teacher,  or  somehow 
an  instrument  of  his  fashioning. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE    CHURCH    AND    THE    EMPIRE    FROM    COMMODUS 
TO   DIOCLETIAN  :    CYPRIAN    AND    HIS    TIMES. 

•ETURNING  to  the  West,  we  may  do  well 
to  set  before  ourselves  in  one  brief  view 
the  relations  of  Christianity  with  the 
government  from  Com  modus  to  Dioele- 
tian.  There  was  no  long-settled  policy, 
because  there  was  no  such  thing  as  a  dynasty  remain- 
ing long  in  power.  As  each  emperor  passed  away, 
the  supreme  power  fell  from  the  dying  ruler's  hand 
to  the  strongest  hand  that  was  near  to  grasp  it,  more 
often  a  distinguished  general  than  a  natural  heir. 
Septimius,  a  North  African  soldier,  established  him- 
self on  the  throne  after  the  murder  of  Commodus  in 
193.  Inclined  at  first  to  show  favor  to  Christians,  as 
believing  that  he  had  been  restored  from  dangerous 
sickness  by  Proculus,  a  Christian  of  his  household, 
who  anointed  him  with  oil  and  prayed  over  him,  he 
became  in  202  a  persecutor,  issuing  an  edict  which 
forbade  the  making  of  proselytes  either  to  Judaism 
or  to  Christianity.  His  son  Caracalla,  211-217, 
though  murderous  and  cruel,  had  contracted  a  preju- 
dice in  his  boyhood  against  persecution  of  Christians, 
and  put  an  end  to  it  as  soon  as  possible  after  his 
father's  death.  One  act  of  Caracalla's  reign  had  far- 
reaching  consequences  for  the  Christian  Church.  By 
extending  the  privilege  of  Roman  citizenship  to  all 

360 


Roman  Citizenship  Given  to  all  Freemen.     361 

the  free  inhabitants  of  the  Empire,  he  made  it  impos- 
sible to  crucify  a  Christian,  or  throw  him  to  the  wild 
beasts,  or  even  subject  him  to  torture,  unless  that 
Christian  were  a  slave,  or  the  case  had  been  referred 
to  the  emperor  in  person.  Law  might  indeed  be 
violated  in  times  of  popular  excitement,  and  Roman 
citizenship  could  never  more  be  regarded  as  seriously 
as  when  it  had  been  the  privilege  of  a  few.  But 
that  every  free  Christian  man  was  ranked  henceforth 
as  a  Roman  citizen,  must  have  been  a  partial  protec- 
tion against  wanton  cruelties. 

Caracalla  was  murdered  by  Macrinus,  who  then 
succeeded  him,  but  gave  place  in  a  few  months  to 
Elagabalus,  218-222,  a  monster  of  vice,  and  a  dev- 
otee of  the  most  degrading  heathenism,  but  in  no- 
wise disposed  to  persecute  anything  that  passed  as  a 
religion.  His  cousin  and  successor,  Alexander  Se- 
verus,  222-235,  best  of  Roman  emperors  since  the 
Antonines,  was  also  an  eclectic  in  religion,  but  an 
eclectic  of  a  nobler  order.  In  the  oratory  of  his  pri- 
vate devotions  he  had  no  images  of  heathen  gods, 
but  statues  of  great  men  of  history  or  legend,  who 
had  somehow  specially  attracted  him,  Alexander  the 
Great,  Orpheus,  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  Abraham  from 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  Jesus  Christ  from  the 
New.  We  have  seen  his  mother,  Julia  Mamsea, 
whose  power  over  him  was  great,  seeking  to  put  her- 
self under  the  influence  of  Origen.  Probably  both 
Julia  and  Alexander  were  agnostic  souls  of  the  kind 
who  believe  a  little  of  everything,  and  only  a  little 
of  anything,  but  at  least  there  was  no  persecution  in 
this  reign.     It  was  a  Christian  custom  to  announce 


362  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  names  of  candidates  for  ordination,  so  that  if 
there  were  any  objection  to  any  of  them  the  ob- 
jectors might  be  heard.  This  custom  Alexander  is 
said  to  have  imitated  in  connection  with  his  appoint- 
ments to  important  offices  of  State,  so  that  he  might 
be  warned  against  unfit  men.  It  is  told  also  that 
there  was  a  dispute  about  the  ownership  of  a  piece 
of  ground  in  Rome.  The  Christians  claimed  it,  and 
were  going  to  build  a  church.  Tradition  says  that 
it  was  the  site  of  Sta.  Maria  in  Trastevere.  The 
Guild  of  Cooks  wanted  it  too,  and  plainly  thought 
that  the  Christian  body  could  not  hold  any  property 
securely.  Alexander  astonished  them  by  deciding 
that  it  was  better  that  land  be  used  for  the  worship 
of  the  Deitjr  in  any  manner,  than  that  it  be  given  to 
cooks.1 

Alexander  and  his  mother  being  murdered  in  their 
camp  on  the  Rhine,  near  Mayence,  Maximin  the 
Thracian,  a  giant  eight  feet  high,  and  the  first  "  bar- 
barian "  that  ever  ruled  the  Romans,  occupied  the 
throne  for  three  years,  235-238.  In  brutish  opposi- 
tion to  his  predecessor,  Maximin  persecuted  Chris- 
tians because  Alexander  had  favored  them.  It  was 
his  policy  to  attack  the  leaders,  and  thus  Pontianus 
of  Rome  and  Hippolytus  were  banished  to  deadly 

1  The  building  of  churches  for  Christian  worship  would  seem 
to  date  from  this  reign.  It  can  hardly  have  begun  earlier.  Prob- 
ably the  Church  began  with  worship  from  house  to  house,  then 
went  on  to  the  giving  up  of  great  rooms  for  permanent  religious 
use  by  people  of  wealth,  then  to  the  building  of  large  halls  es- 
pecially for  Christian  uses  on  private  property,  then  at  last  to  the 
open  purchase  of  real  estate  and  putting  up  of  a  building  by  a 
Christian  congregation  as  such.  By  the  end  of  the  century 
church  buildings  were  fairly  common,  and  were  a  recognized  ob- 
ject for  a  persecutor's  attack. 


The  Decian  Persecution. 


Sardinia,  but  persecution  was  by  no  means  confined 
to  such  distinguished  men.  In  this  reign  Origen's 
rich  helper,  Ambrose,  became  a  confessor  at  Csesarea, 
and  was  sent  an  exile  into  Germany.  To  the  same 
period  is  ascribed  the  marvellous  story  of  St.  Ursula 
and  XI.  M.  V.,  which  being  misinterpreted,  made 
eleven  martyr  virgins  into  eleven  thousand  virgins. 

Gordian,  238-244,  left  the  Christians  undisturbed. 
Philip  the  Arabian,  his  murderer  and  successor,  244- 
249,  was  a  correspondent  of  Origen,  and  came  to  be 
supposed,  a  century  and  a  half  later,  to  have  been 
the  first  Christian  emperor.  Protector  he  may  have 
been,  convert  never.  He  fell  in  his  turn  before 
Decius,  whose  brief  reign,  249-251,  is  memorable  in 
the  Church's  story.  It  was  Marcus  Aurelius  over 
again,  a  ruler  of  the  old  Roman  stock  and  temper, 
determined  to  suppress  what  he  held  to  be  corrupt- 
ing forces  in  the  civil  life  of  his  day.  Thus  he  re- 
vived the  office  of  Censor,  unfilled  since  the  days 
of  Tiberius.  In  the  same  serious  spirit  of  reform  he 
set  out  to  destroy  Christianity,  and  knowing  better 
than  Marcus  how  great  a  task  that  was,  he  set  about 
it  even  more  seriously  and  systematically.  We  have 
nothing  like  a  systematic  record  of  the  sufferers, 
only  striking  examples  recorded  here  and  there.  Of 
bishops,  we  are  told  that  Fabian  of  Rome,  Babylas 
of  Antioch,  Carpus  of  Thyatira  and  Pionius  of 
Smyrna  were  enrolled  in  the  noble  army  of  martyrs, 
and  Alexander  of  Jerusalem  died  in  prison  at  Csesa- 
rea, a  confessor.  Polyeuctus,  a  soldier,  died  for  Christ 
on  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates,  and  the  maiden 
Agatha   in  Sicily.     Lampsacus   on   the   Hellespont 


364  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

boasted  four  martyrs,  and  great  Alexandria  a  host 
of  them,  among  whom  Nemesion  was  burned  "  be- 
tween two  thieves,"  glorying  in  the  insult  which 
brought  him  nearer  to  the  imitation  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Abdon  and  Sennen,  Persian  princes,  suffered  at 
Rome,  and  the  fresco  in  the  Catacombs  recalls  their 
strange  names  and  foreign  dress.  If  the  story  of 
Cassian  of  Imola,  schoolmaster  and  shorthand- 
writer,  given  over  to  his  boys  to  be  put  to  death 
with  their  sharpened  styles,  seems  like  a  tasteless 
jest  of  some  late  inventor,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  those  were  days  when  savage  cruelty  and  de- 
lighting in  witnessing  victims'  pain  were  taught  peo- 
ple from  childhood  in  every  Roman  town.  The 
story  of  St.  Cassian,  if  not  certain,  is  not  impossible. 
Bithynia,  Thrace,  Crete,  all  had  their  martyrs. 
Africa  furnished,  as  usual,  a  splendid  muster-roll. 
When  Decius  died  in  battle  after  a  reign  of  but 
thirty  months,  it  must  have  been  felt  in  all  the 
Churches  that  the  Lord  had  shortened  the  days. 

Yet  even  so  Gallus,  251-253,  did  not  stay  the  per- 
secution. He  only  did  not  press  it  on  with  a  master 
hand.  And  a  plague  which  devastated  large  por- 
tions of  the  Empire  in  these  years  did  something  to 
aggravate  persecution  by  exciting  superstitious  fear. 
Valerian,  253-260,  began  his  career  as  a  favorer  of 
Christians,  of  whom  he  had  many  in  his  household, 
but  in  257,  under  the  influence  of  a  colleague,  Mac- 
rianus,  he  published  an  edict  that  all  Christians  must 
return  to  the  religion  of  their  fathers  or  suffer  ban- 
ishment. The  next  year  a  fresh  edict  proclaimed  the 
penalty  of  death  for  the  Christian  clergy,  and  for 


Chief  Victims  under  Valerian.  365 


senators,  and  men  of  standing  generally,  loss  of  posi- 
tion and  forfeiture  of  propert}'.  Women  of  rank 
were  to  lose  their  property,  and  go  into  exile.  Ob- 
stinacy in  any  case  was  to  be  met  with  death. 

The  most  notable  victims  of  this  persecution  were 
Xystus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  his  more  famous  deacon, 
Lawrence,  burned  over  a  slow  fire  in  the  attempt  to 
make  him  disclose  the  wealth  that  was  understood 
to  be  in  his  keeping,  and  Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Car- 
thage. To  this  persecution  belongs  the  first  known 
to  us  of  Spanish  martyrs,  Fructuosus,  Bishop  of 
Tarragona.  He  was  burned  alive,  with  two  of  his 
deacons,  and  St.  Augustine  boasts  (Sermon  273)  that 
Hercules  (the  legendary  founder  of  Tarragona)  could 
avail  nothing  "  against  one  feeble  old  man,  shaking 
in  every  limb."  The  feeble  old  man  was  of  a  stout 
heart.  He  refused  a  cup  of  cordial  offered  him  on 
his  way  to  death.  It  was  Friday  morning,  and  the 
fast  lasted  till  mid-afternoon.  At  the  gate  of  the 
amphitheatre  he  spoke  to  the  people  who  were 
crowding  after  him :  "  Be  of  good  cheer.  You 
shall  not  want  for  a  pastor,  neither  shall  the  love 
and  promise  of  God  fail  you  here  or  hereafter.  This 
which  you  behold  is  but  the  weakness  of  an  hour." 
A  Christian  caught  his  hand,  and  begged  him  to  re- 
member him.  "I  must  bear  in  mind,"  said  the  mar- 
tyr, "the  whole  Catholic  Church  spread  from  the 
East  to  the  West."  The  fires  were  kindled,  and  the 
martyr's  bonds  were  shortly  burned  away.  Then 
"mindful  of  his  customary  form,"  the  old  man  bent 
his  trembling  knees  and  so  finished  his  world-wide 
prayers  in  the  attitude  of  prayer.    A  small  punctilio ! 


366  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Yes,  but  not  too  small.  Nothing  was  too  great  to 
be  endured  and  endeavored,  but  then  also  nothing 
was  too  small  to  be  cared  for,  in  the  service  of  his 
Lord. 

Valerian  fell  from  power  in  260,  becoming  a  hope- 
less prisoner  in  the  hands  of  the  Persian  king  Sapor. 
His  son  Gallienus,  who  succeeded,  260-268,  put  an 
immediate  end  to  the  persecution  and  proclaimed 
Christianity  a  religio  licita,  an  officially  tolerated 
worship.  The  East  did  not  enter  into  this  freedom 
till  the  death  of  Macrianus  three  years  later.  Then 
the  Church  "  had  rest  forty  years."  The  great  Au- 
relian,  270-2T5,  had  resolved  to  be  a  persecutor,  but 
he  was  cut  off  by  death.  Diocletian,  284-305,  began, 
like  Valerian,  with  favoring  Christians,  but  came  to 
be  so  turned  against  them  in  the  last  of  his  life  as  to 
begin  in  303  the  most  deadly  of  all  persecutions. 
The  "  tenth  wave,"  that  last  overwhelming,  horrible 
assault  was  called,  from  which  the  bruised,  bewil- 
dered, fainting  Church  was  lifted  into  sudden  sun- 
shine by  Constantine's  Edicts  of  Toleration. 

From  this  sketch  of  the  relations  of  Church  and 
State  we  must  go  back  to  take  up  the  story  of  the 
Western  Church  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century. 
The  Church's  story  is  the  story  of  Cyprian  of  Car- 
thage, for  two  years,  246^248,  a  fresh  convert  from 
heathenism,  then  for  ten  years  more  a  bishop,  sud- 
denly exalted  to  be  the  very  prince  of  Latin  Chris- 
tianity, then  more  highly  exalted  still  as  a  martyr, 
sealing  his  testimony  with  his  blood. 

Thascius  Cyprianus  was  a  man  of  distinction  in 
heathen  Carthage,  a  lawyer,  an  orator,  a  rich  man 


Self-sacrifice  and  Self-will.  367 

owning  a  fine  estate  in  the  best  residence-section  of 
the  city,  a  man  with  many  friends  in  the  best  heathen 
society,  a  man  who,  as  the  leading  advocate  of  the 
African  bar,  famous  for  centuries  for  its  eloquence 
and  power — Africa  was  called  "nurse  of  pleaders" 
in  the  days  of  Juvenal — had  fame  and  fortune  at  his 
feet.  Of  the  history  of  his  conversion  we  know 
nothing,  save  that  he  regarded  himself  as  owing  his 
soul  to  the  presbyter  Csecilianus.  His  convictions 
once  formed  were  strong  and  clear,  his  powers  were 
splendid,  and  we  need  not  be  surprised  that  shortly 
after  his  baptism,  which  probably  took  place  at  the 
Easter  festival,  246,  we  find  him  living  in  the  house 
of  Csecilianus  as  an  attendant  deacon.  Two  charac- 
teristics of  Cyprian  must  be  set  down  at  once.  He 
was  a  man  of  immense  self-sacrifice  and  (if  one  dare 
say  it)  of  eminent  self-will.  The  self-sacrifice  ap- 
pears over  and  over.  As  catechumen,  he  sells  some 
of  his  property  that  he  may  give  the  proceeds  to 
relieve  distress  among  the  poor.  As  deacon,  he 
strips  himself  of  his  beautiful  gardens,  which  friends 
bought  in  after  a  time,  and  restored  to  him,  insisting 
that  he  must  keep  his  home  there.  But  the  self-will 
keeps  showing  too.  It  is  the  necessary  quality  of  a 
man  of  extraordinary  power  and  deep  conviction  and 
devoted  purpose.  It  is  only  fair  to  add  that  while 
Cyprian  had  his  temptations  on  that  side,  his  self- 
will  was  always  tempered  by  charity,  by  soberness 
of  judgment,  by  real  humility.  His  supreme  object 
was  always  the  development  of  a  really  Christ-like 
life.  "  This  is  what  people  ought  to  do  who  want  to 
please  God,"  was  a  characteristic  form  of  counsel 


368  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

with  him,  according  to  Pontius,  his  deacon  and  biog- 
rapher. Wanting  to  please  God  was  a  motive  never 
far  from  his  thoughts.  He  was  always  trying,  as 
Archbishop  Benson1  finely  renders  a  clumsy  phrase 
of  Pontius,  "  to  translate  the  ancient  saints  into  mod- 
ern life." 

Diaconate  and  presbyterate  must  have  been  very 
brief.  But  little  more  than  two  years  from  Cypri- 
an's baptism,  Donatus,  bishop  of  Carthage,  died,  and 
Cyprian  was  called  to  succeed  him.  There  was  ob- 
jection among  the  clergy,  and  a  certain  group  of  five 
presbyters  were  irreconcilable  in  their  opposition  to 
the  choice  of  a  "novice"  to  be  their  head,  but  the 
laity  were  outspoken  in  demanding  for  their  leader 
the  golden-mouthed  orator,  the  warm-hearted  helper 
of  their  suffering  poor,  the  man  whom  they  felt 
to  be  a  man  of  power.  The  neighboring  bishops 
confirmed  the  election,  and  Cyprian  was  consecrated, 
and  entered  upon  his  work. 

"  A  bishop's  work  uphill "  is  the  heading  given  by 
Archbishop  Benson  to  his  account  of  the  next  few 
months.  It  does  seem  as  if  the  Church  in  Africa 
was  a  Church  of  particularly  low  attainments.  At 
any  rate  there  were  bishops  so  poorly  supported  that 
they  deemed  it  necessary  to  supplement  their  in- 
comes by  means  of  agriculture,  commerce,  usury, 
and  even  the  slave-trade.  There  were  bishops  whose 
honesty  was  doubted  in  the  markets,  and  bishops 
whose  morality  in  other  lines  was  not  above  suspi- 

1  Cyprian,  His  Life,  His  Times,  His  Work,  p.  21.  This  life  of 
Cyprian  by  the  late  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  is  beyond  com- 
parison the  reference-book  for  all  who  wish  to  get  vivid  ideas  of 
the  Cyprianic  acts  and  age. 


The  Pope  of  Carthage.  369 

cion.  Some  again  were  too  ignorant  to  prepare  their 
catechumens  for  baptism,  or  to  escape  the  introduc- 
tion of  heretical  phrases  into  their  liturgies.  Among 
the  clergy  could  be  found  makers  of  idols  and  com- 
pounders of  incense  for  heathen  use.  One  of  Cypri- 
an's first  letters  is  addressed  to  a  brother-bishop, 
Euchratius,  who  asks  what  is  to  be  done  with  an  ex- 
actor, who  has  left  the  horrible  atmosphere  of  the 
stage  of  those  days,  but  still  earns  his  living  by  train- 
ing boys  for  that  detestable  life.  Cyprian's  answer 
is  characteristic.  If  the  man  cannot  find  any  other 
means  of  support,  he  must  be  put  on  the  Church's 
poor-roll,  and  be  content  with  only  a  bare  subsist- 
ence. If  he  refuses,  he  must  be  excommunicated. 
If  the  Church  over  which  Euchratius  presides  is  too 
poor  to  support  the  man,  let  him  be  sent  to  Carthage 
and  enrolled  among  the  poor  there.  This  case  illus- 
trates not  only  Cyprian's  mind,  but  his  position. 
The  Pope  of  Carthage  1  has  no  authority  over  these 
bishops  around   him,  though   he  presides   in   their 

1  "Papa,"  which  the  Church  might  have  translated  by 
"Father,"  but  has  chosen  to  render  as  "Pope,"  seems  to  have 
been  an  African  title  in  its  origin.  The  common  statement  that 
it  was  in  early  times  a  title  of  all  bishops  is  without  foundation, 
though  in  the  fifth  century  it  had  come  to  be  a  common  piece  of 
politeness  to  use  it  in  addressing  a  bishop  of  distinction.  Opta- 
tus  of  Carthage  is  called  "our  Papa"  in  the  vision  of  Saturus 
(p.  244).  Tertullian  in  his  De  Pudicitia  (xiii.)  calls  some  bishop 
"benedictus  papa,"  but  even  if,  which  is  very  doubtful,  he  meant 
the  Roman  bishop,  he  was  using  an  African,  not  a  Roman  title. 
Heraclas  of  Alexandria,  232-247,  is  referred  to  as  "papa  "  by  his 
successor  Dionysius,  and  the  title  of  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  for 
ages  has  been  "  Pope  and  Patriarch  of  the  great  city  Alexandria, 
and  (Ecumenical  Judge."  Cyprian's  Roman  correspondents  ad- 
dress him  as  "blessed  Pope,"  the  "  benedict  us  papa  "  of  Tertul- 
lian 's  sneer,  but  never  speak  of  their  own  bishop  so.  The  first 
Roman  bishop  to  have  the  title  is  Marcellinus,  296-304. 

X 


370  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

meetings.  But  Cyprian  has  authority  with  his  col- 
leagues from  the  start.  He  was  a  born  leader,  and 
he  began  forthwith  to  lead. 

One  of  the  new  bishop's  special  cares  was  to  watch 
over  the  Church  virgins.  It  was  an  understood 
thing  that  a  Christian  woman  might  have  a  vocation 
to  give  herself  irrevocably  to  the  service  of  God  in 
a  single  life,  just  as  much  as  some  other  might  be 
called  to  commit  herself  irrevocably  to  the  service  of 
God  in  the  wedded  life.  Cyprian  had  the  heartiest 
belief  in  such  vocations  and  respect  for  them.  The 
virgins  are  "the  flower  of  the  ecclesiastical  seed," 
"  the  more  illustrious  portion  of  Christ's  flock." 
Yet  he  has  much  fault  to  find.  They  are  in  the 
habit  of  attending  marriage-feasts,  where  a  shameless 
license  of  speech  and  manners  still  prevails.  Many 
of  them,  naturally,  are  rich.  The  poor  could  not 
thus  dedicate  themselves  for  want  of  an  assured  sup- 
port. The  rich  virgin,  then,  is  liable  to  some  special 
temptations,  which  call  out  from  the  watchful  chief 
pastor  a  treatise  On  the  D?*es8  of  Virgins.  There  is 
as  yet  no  bringing  together  of  the  dedicated  into  one 
company,  with  a  uniform  dress,  a  fixed  rule,  a  cen- 
tral authority.  Nay,  we  find  cases  where  such 
women,  probably  having  no  homes  or  heathen  homes, 
had  shared  the  dwellings,  and  even  the  bed-cham- 
bers, of  some  of  the  clergy.  It  seems  to  have  been  a 
matter  of  foolhardy,  yet  in  its  first  meaning  holy, 
audacity  of  devotees  who  firmly  believed  that  they 
could  tread  upon  all  the  power  of  the  enemy.  Cy- 
prian refuses  to  impute  bad  motives.  They  who 
should  be  adjudged  after  strict  trial  to  have  preserved 


Cyprian  Avoids  the  Persecution.  371 

their  innocence  are  to  suffer  no  penalty  for  the  past. 
But  for  any  renewal  of  such  scandalous  appearances 
after  this  warning  excommunication  is  the  only  pos- 
sible answer. 

The  Decian  persecution  broke  upon  the  Church, 
and  men  began  to  be  sifted  as  wheat.  All  Christians 
must  renounce  their  religion,  and  obtain  a  magis- 
trate's certificate  to  that  effect  before  a  given  day,  or 
else  they  would  be  liable  to  torture  and  death.  Cy- 
prian went  into  concealment.  He  was  blamed  for  it 
by  man}r,  and  the  Roman  clergy,  led  by  a  Puritan 
presbyter,  Novatian,  and  glorying  in  the  martyrdom 
of  their  own  Fabian,  expressed  grave  concern  for 
their  brethren  whose  bishop  had  left  them  pastorless. 
Cyprian,  with  solemn  irony,  returned  their  letter  on 
the  ground  that  it  was  manifestly  a  forgery.  Of 
course  they  had  not  been  guilty  of  such  an  imperti- 
nence. To  us  his  courage  needs  no  defence.  Nei^ 
ther  does  his  judgment.  He  saw  the  Church  of 
North  Africa  in  sore  need  of  leadership.  He  be- 
lieved that  he  was  called  to  be  a  leader.  He  saved 
himself  for  the  work  of  God.  Self-preservation  did 
not  mean  self-indulgence  for  the  bishop  of  Carthage, 
rich  and  gifted  and  admired  as  he  was.  It  meant 
daily  griefs  of  opposition  of  good  men,  of  miscon- 
struction, of  jealousy,  of  failure  to  accomplish  good 
purposes,  of  perplexity,  of  temptation,  of  discourage- 
ment, and  all  this  borne  by  an  exile  trying  to  manage 
great  affairs  from  a  precarious  hiding-place,  through 
agents  of  inferior  capacity. 

Cyprian  had  expected  his  Church  to  show  itself 
weak.     The  havoc  actually  wrought  by  persecution 


372  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

was  beyond  his  worst  fears.  There  were  martyrs 
not  a  few,  and  confessors  even  more  wonderful  in 
their  long  endurance.  Space  fails  to  tell  the  glorious 
story  which  the  bishop's  letters  bring  before  us. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  he  reckons  that  more  than 
one  half  of  the  whole  Christian  population  aposta- 
tized. They  did  not  even  wait  to  be  summoned  to 
trial  and  death.  They  flocked  to  the  offices  of  the 
magistrates,  they  crowded  the  neighboring  streets, 
they  brought  young  children,  even  infants  fresh 
from  their  baptism,  to  have  the  incense-grains 
dropped  from  their  tiny  hands.  Many  of  the  clergy 
deserted  their  posts,  and  some  denied  their  Saviour. 
The  bishop  is  described  as  feeling  like  one  sitting 
amid  the  ruins  of  his  house.  And  yet  this  terrible 
falling  away  was  followed  by  a  sweeping  reaction. 
Misery  was  the  portion  of  those  who  really  believed, 
and  yet  had  denied.  Some  of  them  came  before  the 
magistrates  to  denounce  themselves  as  still  servants 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  were  admitted  to  the  baptism 
of  blood.  Others  hid  themselves  out  of  sight,  and 
passed  their  lives  in  mourning  and  self-abasement. 
Some,  indeed,  made  light  of  their  sin,  excusing  it  as 
a  matter  of  necessity.  But  one  way  or  another, 
there  were  a  great  host  that  wanted  to  be  recognized 
as  Christians,  though  they  had  once  denied  Christ. 
What  was  the  Church  to  do  ? 

Till  Cyprian's  time  the  Church  had  never  been  re- 
quired to  meet  that  question  with  a  definite  policy. 
The  Decian  persecution  forced  it  on.  The  great 
bishop  from  his  refuge  began  to  gird  himself  to  the 
task.     These    Lapsi — "  the   fallen "   is    the    simple 


Sacrificati)  Thurificatz,   Libellatici.  373 

meaning  of  Cyprian's  word,  and  "  the  lapsed "  is 
somewhat  over-technical  in  its  sound — were  divisible 
into  three  classes,  Sacrificati,  Thurijicati,  Libellatici. 
The  first,  the  Sacrificers,  had  gone  through  an  elabo- 
rate heathen  ceremonial,  putting  on  the  "  liturgic 
veil,"  assisting  at  a  victim's  death,  bringing  a  portion 
to  the  altar  fire.  They  had  gone  out  of  their  way 
to  identify  themselves  with  heathenism  beyond  the 
requirements  of  the  law.  The  next,  the  Incense - 
offerers,  had  simply  thrown  a  little  incense  on  the 
fire  burning  before  some  image,  as  a  passing  formal- 
ity of  acknowledgment  of  the  established  religion. 
No  one  regarded  it  as  meaning  much  in  the  way  of 
belief  in  heathen  gods,  but  it  did  mean — the  magis- 
trates knew  that  well — the  giving  up  of  that  exclu- 
siveness  of  sovereignty  over  the  believer's  life,  which 
was  the  very  thing  which  made  the  Roman  authori- 
ties most  bitter  against  the  Christian  name.  A 
Christian  who  on  a  pinch  would  do  what  the  law  in- 
sisted on  his  doing,  was  a  Christian  of  whom  the 
Empire  need  have  no  fear.  And  that  same  common 
sense  was  in  the  dealings  of  the  magistracy  with  the 
third  class, — the  Libellatici,  the  Certificate-holders. 
Doubtless  every  Christian  who  sacrificed,  or  of- 
fered incense,  received  for  his  protection  a  certificate 
of  having  done  so,  but  the  Libellatici  were  Christians 
who  had  secured  such  certificates  without  having 
done  the  evil  deeds  at  all.  Certificates  could  be 
bought  for  money.  They  were  offered  by  favor. 
They  might  be  obtained  by  fraud.  The  magistrates 
were  willing  to  have  it  all  go  on.     The  Empire  need 


374  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

not  fear  any  Christian  who  was  not  inflexibly  loyal 
to  his  God. 

But  while  Roman  magistrates  judged  thus 
shrewdly,  it  was  hard  for  a  good  many  Christians  to 
see  that  it  was  apostasy  from  Jesus  Christ  just  to  ac- 
cept a  certificate  that  one  had  sacrificed,  when  one 
never  had,  and  never  would.  Some  consciences 
could  not  be  made  to  feel  deeply  that  the  burning  of 
a  grain  of  incense  before  an  idol  was  such  a  deadly 
sin,  when  one  did  not  believe  in  it,  nor  mean  any- 
thing by  it,  and  it  was  done  only  to  save  one's  life. 
In  such  a  dangerous  time  untender  consciences  con- 
trived a  most  dangerous  way  to  peace. 

It  was  a  very  natural  way,  too.  The  Church's  or- 
dinary machinery  was  out  of  gear.  The  bishop,  the 
chief  judge  of  matters  of  discipline,  was  in  hiding. 
The  eyes  of  all  the  Carthaginian  Church  were  fixed 
on  the  daily  spectacle  of  the  "  confessors,"  many  of 
them  on  the  way  to  martyrdom  itself.  The  "  fallen  " 
of  all  classes  turned  to  these  prisoners  of  hope,  be- 
seeching them  to  secure  their  restoration  to  the 
Church's  peace.  It  began  with  small  beginnings,  as 
all  movements  do.  A  Carthaginian  at  Rome,  who 
had  been  an  eminent  sufferer,  begged  a  friend  among 
the  confessors  at  Carthage  to  get  them  to  join  in  ask- 
ing mercy  for  his  two  sisters.  A  Carthaginian 
martyr  left  a  dying  request  in  behalf  of  his  mother. 
The  first  requests  were  for  persons  naturally  con- 
nected with  the  petitioners,  and  they  asked  simply 
that  the  regular  authorities  would  be  as  tender  as 
they  could,  when  they  came  to  sit  in  judgment  in 
the  regular  way.     But  when  the  idea  of  interference 


Cyprian1  s  Feeling  about  Martyrs  anal  Confessors.  375 

was  once  started,  it  was  like  the  letting  out  of 
waters.  The  prisons  were  besieged.  The  confes- 
sors— alas  ! — became  inflated.  Libelli  pads,  not  mere 
requests  for  gentle  consideration,  but  certificates 
purporting  to  admit  the  bearer  to  the  Church's  com- 
munion, were  issued,  Cyprian's  letters  tell  us,  by- 
thousands  in  a  day.  At  last  there  appeared  a  paper 
purporting  to  come  from  "all  the  confessors,"  and 
granting  peace  to  "  all  the  fallen."  There  was  to  be  a 
general  amnesty,  a  wiping  of  the  slate,  a  break-down, 
in  other  words,  of  all  discipline. 

It  was  the  natural  result  of  a  frenzy  of  admira- 
tion which  Cyprian  himself  had  done  much  to  cul- 
tivate. "  Oh  !  blessed  prison,"  he  had  written  to 
the  confessors,  "  on  which  your  presence  hath  shed 
light !  Oh  !  blessed  prison,  which  sends  the  men  of 
God  to  heaven !  Oh !  darkness  shining  above  the 
sun  itself,  and  brighter  than  this  light  of  the  world ! " 
(Letter  lxxx.)  "  How  blessed  is  our  Church,  which 
the  greatness  of  the  divine  favor  thus  illuminates, 
on  which  in  these  our  times  the  glorious  blood  of 
the  martyrs  sheds  radiance  !  Aforetime  she  was 
white  in  the  good  works  of  the  brethren,  now  is  she 
empurpled  in  the  blood  of  the  martyrs.  Her  gar- 
lands lack  neither  the  lily  nor  the  rose.  Now  let 
every  one  contend  for  the  fullest  meed  of  either 
honor.  Let  them  win  a  crown  either  white  with 
good  works  or  purple  with  suffering.  In  the  heav- 
enly camp  both  peace  and  war  have  their  own  gar- 
lands wherewith  the  soldier  of  Christ  may  be 
crowned  for  victory  "  (Letter  viii.).  If  on  the  whole 
the  balance  is  here  held  true,  yet  the  effect  was  likely 


376  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

to  be  one-sided.  The  martyrs  are  spoken  of  as  "  daz- 
zling" (rutili).  Certainly  the  eyes  of  the  Church 
were  dazzled.  Old  distinctions  between  "strict" 
and  "  lax  "  were  lost  for  a  time  in  a  mad  rush  to  lay 
all  discipline  at  the  confessors'  feet. 

It  needed  a  strong  man  to  stem  such  a  tide,  but 
Cyprian  accomplished  it.  His  two  great  objects  at 
first  were  to  gain  time,  and  to  bring  the  sounder 
opinion  of  the  Church  at  large  to  bear  upon  his  prov- 
ince. For  both  purposes  he  developed  an  active  cor- 
respondence with  the  Roman  Church,  which  gave 
him  cordial  support.  He  laid  down  two  preliminary 
propositions,  that  the  question  was  too  large  for  any 
one  bishop,  or  group  of  bishops,  to  handle  alone,  and 
that  certainly  the  fallen  ought  in  no  case  to  be  re- 
stored on  such  terms  as  to  put  a  premium  on  apos- 
tasy. He  suggested  (1)  that  the  whole  subject  should 
be  kept  waiting  till  large  councils  of  bishops  could 
come  together  safely,  and  agree  on  some  general 
principles  of  procedure,  (2)  that  then  the  local  cases 
should  be  left  to  be  examined  and  administered  un- 
der such  general  rules  by  the  bishop  and  his  clergy 
in  every  town,  and  (3)  that  in  the  meantime  this 
honor  should  be  paid  to  the  confessors,  that  when 
any  one  holding  one  of  their  certificates  of  peace  was 
in  danger  of  death,  he  should  be  at  once  restored  to 
communion  without  question. 

This  wise  and  sober  scheme  was  heartily  approved 
by  the  Roman  clergy,  headed  by  Novatian.  It  pre- 
vailed finally  at  Carthage,  but  not  without  an  inter- 
val of  confusion  and  distress.  The  five  presbyters 
who  had  chiefly  opposed  Cyprian's  election  embraced 


The  Schism  of  Felicissimus.  377 

this  opportunity  to  make  trouble  for  him.  What- 
ever he  proposed  seemed  bad,  probably,  in  their  jaun- 
diced eyes.  Their  effect  upon  the  fallen,  whom  they 
incited  to  refuse  discipline  and  demand  immediate 
restoration,  was  so  demoralizing  that  Cyprian  com- 
pares this  "five"  to  the  five  imperial  commissioners 
who  had  conducted  the  persecution  itself.  Chief 
among  them  was  Novatus,  the  presbyter  in  charge  of 
"the  Hill,"  the  part  of  Carthage  where  the  citadel 
and  some  other  chief  buildings  were,  with  probably 
a  rich  and  self-important  congregation.  Novatus 
made  one  Felicissimus  his  deacon  at  the  Hill  church 
without  the  bishop's  consent  to  the  appointment,1 
and  then  the  presbyter  offered  "  peace  "  to  any  num- 
ber of  the  fallen,  while  the  deacon,  with  the  Church 
alms  in  his  keeping,  was  ready  to  give  money  help 
to  any  of  the  poor  among  them,  provided  only  that 
they  would  promise  not  to  submit  to  Cyprian.  It 
became  necessary  to  excommunicate  Felicissimus  and 
a  few  others  of  his  party,  among  them  a  seamstress 
and  a  sausage-maker,  apparently  poor  persons  who 
had  swallowed  the  deacon's  bribe.  Novatus  betook 
himself  to  Rome  with  a  heart  bent  on  mischief.  He 
would  have  had  a  trial,  if  he  had  remained,  on 
charges  of  shameful  cruelty  to  his  aged  father  and 
his  own  wife.  Felicissimus  attached  himself  to 
another  of  the  five  presbyters,  Fortunatus,  and  later 
persuaded  him  to  accept  consecration  as  a  rival  bishop 

JThat  he  made  the  man  a  deacon  in  the  sense  of  professing  to 
ordain  him,  is  asserted  by  Doctor  Hatch  (Bampton  Lectures,  p.  110) 
with  no  particular  ground,  and  against  a  serious  weight  of  objec- 
tion. Cyprian  was  not  the  man  to  leave  such  an  irregularity  un- 
complained  of. 


378  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

of  Carthage  from  one  Privatus,  a  former  bishop  of 
Lambsese,  who  had  himself  been  deposed  for  heresy 
and  other  grave  offences.  But  before  that  happened 
the  party  of  laxity  was  practically  crushed.  Some 
threats  from  the  factious  clergy  kept  Cyprian  from 
returning,  as  he  had  hoped,  to  keep  Easter,  251,  in 
Carthage,  but  the  laity  generally  believed  in  their 
bishop  and  followed  him,  and  he  was  soon  able  to 
come  back  to  them  after  an  absence  of  fourteen 
months. 

Easter  had  fallen  on  March  23.  It  was  probably 
early  in  April  that  Cyprian  had  the  happiness  of 
meeting  in  council  a  gathering  of  bishops  from  the 
provinces  of  Africa,  Numidia,  and  the  Mauritanias. 
They  came  to  consider  the  behavior  of  the  refractory 
clergy  and  the  general  subject  of  the  lapsed.  In  the 
former  matter  Cyprian  was  thoroughly  upheld.  In 
the  latter  he  was  brought  to  change  his  mind.  He 
did  not  always  tell  his  thoughts,  and  he  had  the  grace 
of  withholding  his  own  judgment  from  ripening  too 
fast.  When  he  had  proposed  to  postpone  for  a  time 
the  question  of  the  "fallen,"  his  object  was  to  give 
other  people  a  chance  of  coming  to  a  better  mind. 
To  his  own  surprise,  probably,  he  found  his  own 
mind  changing.  He  was  more  ready  to  make  allow- 
ance, and  to  sanction  gentle  measures.  The  decision 
of  the  council  was  that  all  cases  must  be  examined 
on  their  own  merits,  but  that  in  general  Libellatics 
were  to  be  restored  after  some  years  of  penance,  per- 
sons who  had  actually  sacrificed,  not  till  the  hour  of 
death.  If  any  held  back  from  public  penance  till 
they  were  dangerously  ill,  they  were  not  to  be  re- 


Cyprian  Suppresses  Information.  379 

ceived  at  all.  The  council  made  no  provision  for  the 
case  of  a  man  restored  on  what  seemed  to  be  a  death- 
bed, and  afterward  recovering.  Such  a  case  came 
before  Cyprian  afterward,  and  with  a  characteristic 
mingling  of  charity  and  dry  humor  he  suggested  that 
it  would  not  do  to  insist  on  a  man's  dying.  If  he 
had  fulfilled  the  appointed  conditions  of  restoration 
to  the  Church's  peace,  and  then  God  had  wonder- 
fully raised  hirn  up  and  given  him  an  extension  of 
his  earthly  life,  it  was  plainly  God's  will  that  the 
man  should  have  and  enjoy  what  the  Church  had 
rightly  by  its  rule  bestowed. 

But  while  the  council  was  thus  attending  to  its 
regular  business,  it  was  agitated  from  time  to  time 
by  disturbing  news  from  Rome.  Just  as  it  began  its 
sessions,  Cyprian  had  received  a  letter  from  Corne- 
lius, long  known  as  a  Christian  presbyter  of  noble 
family,  announcing  his  election  and  consecration  as 
bishop  of  Rome.  With  the  letter  came  also  one  of 
bitter  protest  against  the  whole  procedure  from  the 
still  more  eminent  Roman  presbyter,  Novatian.  Ear- 
nestly and  unselfishly  as  Cyprian  always  labored  for 
what  he  believed  to  be  the  right,  it  does  seem  more 
like  the  heathen  lawyer  and  politician  than  like  the 
Christian  bishop,  that  he  suppressed  the  protest  of 
Novatian  until  he  himself  should  have  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  make  up  his  mind  about  the  matter.  Like 
many  other  able  men,  he  wanted  to  "  steer "  his 
colleagues,  and  make  sure  that  they  voted  prop- 
erly. Enough  for  them  to  know  vaguely  that  there 
was  trouble  at  Rome,  and  to  vote  to  send  a  commit- 
tee of  two,  friends  whom  Cyprian  could  thoroughly 


380  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

trust,  to  investigate  and  report.  They  were  to  find 
out  if  there  had  been  a  regular  election  and  valid 
consecration,  and  bring  written  certificates  if  it  were 
so,  and  they  were  also  to  use  their  endeavors  to  re- 
store harmony.  Before  there  was  time  for  these  en- 
voys to  return,  two  other  African  bishops  arrived 
from  Rome,  bringing  convincing  testimony  as  to  all 
that  had  occurred.  Cornelius  had  been  fairly  elected 
and  duly  consecrated.  Yet  Novatian  had  since  been 
consecrated  as  a  rival  bishop  and  was  demanding  to 
be  recognized  in  his  stead. 

Novatian,  successor  of  Hippolytus  in  the  Puritan 
leadership  at  Rome,  was  a  man  of  remarkable  char- 
acter and  history.  A  Stoic  philosopher,  a  writer  of 
considerable  ability,  a  diligent  student  and  noted 
orator,  he  seems  to  have  learned  his  Christianity  in 
his  mature  years  from  some  of  those  who  held  that 
no  great  sin  committed  after  baptism  could  ever  have 
forgiveness  in  this  life.  Such  views  naturally  led 
men  to  postpone  baptism,  and  we  need  not  wonder 
that  Novatian  himself  was  baptized  on  what  seemed 
to  be  his  deathbed.  Such  were  called  clinic  bap- 
tisms, and  the  Church's  general  (and  reasonable) 
rule  was  that  no  man  who  had  so  put  off  obedience 
to  Christ's  command  should  be  commissioned  as  an 
officer  in  Christ's  army.  Novatian,  moreover,  had 
refused  on  his  recovery  to  complete  his  baptism  by 
receiving  from  the  bishop  the  anointing  and  the  la}T- 
ing  on  of  hands  without  which  it  was  the  general 
opinion  that  no  Christian  could  expect  to  "receive 
the  Holy  Ghost."  The  martyred  Fabian  had  over- 
ruled—not wisely,  it  would  seem, — the  general  judg- 


N"ovatian  and  Novatus.  381 

ment  of  his  clergy,  and  had  insisted  on  ordaining 
this  man,  narrow,  hard,  self-willed,  but  manifestly  a 
man  of  power.  Unpopular,  probably,  both  by  his 
character  and  by  his  rigid  views,  he  had  made  him- 
self leader  and  spokesman  of  the  Roman  clergy  after 
Fabian's  death.  With  his  great  ability  he  is  said  to 
have  had  also  a  vaulting  ambition.  He  could  not 
fail  to  have  visions  of  what  he  could  do  for  what  he 
believed  to  be  the  reform  of  the  Church,  if  only  he 
were  bishop  of  the  Roman  see.  When  the  question 
of  the  fallen  came  up,  Novatian  felt  that  in  Cyprian 
he  had  an  ally.  Both  thought  it  outrageous  to  trans- 
fer the  Church's  discipline  from  the  bishop  and  his 
clergy  to  the  confessors  in  their  prison.  Both 
thought  that  discipline  should  be  severe.  But  it 
presently  appeared  that  when  multitudes  fell  into  a 
sin  together,  great  severity  would  mean  great  ruin 
of  souls, — either  wide-spread  apostasy,  or  the  mak- 
ing of  an  easy-going  sect.  Then  these  leaders  fell 
apart.  Cyprian  would  bring  his  net  to  land  so  full 
that  it  would  break  here  and  there.  Novatian  could 
bear  no  breaking.  He  cared  more  for  the  net  than 
for  the  fish. 

Strangely  enough,  on  the  other  hand,  Novatian 
and  Cyprian's  Carthaginian  adversary  Novatus  drew 
together.  At  Carthage,  as  we  have  seen,  the  wor- 
ship of  martyrs  and  confessors  had  been  almost  un- 
bounded. Men  of  all  sorts  of  opinions  as  to  what 
the  Church  might  do  in  its  ordinary  procedure  had 
been  carried  away  by  this  tide  of  fanaticism  to 
think  that  whatever  a  martyr  or  confessor  asked  for 
was  to  be  regarded  as  a  matter  of  special  revelation. 


382  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

But  when  the  whole  Church  set  that  idea  aside, 
Puritans  who  had  been  eager  for  the  restoring  of  the 
fallen  at  what  they  had  regarded  as  a  heavenly  di- 
rection, would  }^et  be  scandalized  at  seeing  the  same 
persons  restored  by  a  body  claiming  no  extraordi- 
nary guidance.  There  was  a  Puritan  party  at  Car- 
thage. Very  likely  Novatus  had  belonged  to  it. 
His  faults  are  said  to  have  been  those  of  a  cold  hard- 
ness. At  any  rate,  when  Novatian  was  indignant  at 
the  too  easy  terms  granted  to  returning  sacrificers 
and  libellatics,  and  embittered  by  the  election  of 
dull  Cornelius  to  the  place  which  he  would  have 
filled  so  much  more  brilliantly,  Novatus  haunted  him 
like  an  evil  genius,  tempting  him  to  divide  the  Church. 
It  was  undoubtedly  against  the  Puritan  conscience  to 
receive  such  offenders  as  these  of  the  late  persecu- 
tion, unless  it  were  by  special  revelation.  Novatian 
was  soon  persuaded  that  he  could  not  even  hold 
communion  with  a  Church  that  received  them.  Six- 
teen bishops  had  attended  the  consecration  of  Cor- 
nelius. Novatus  scoured  Italy  and  secured  three 
whose  consciences  were  of  Novatian's  order.  These 
came  together  and  consecrated  the  Puritan  leader  to 
be  bishop,  unelected,  of  the  faithful  at  Rome. 

At  first  glance  it  might  seem  the  most  hopeless  of 
causes  in  which  Novatian  had  embarked.  Every- 
thing had  been  regular  and  orderly  in  the  election  of 
Cornelius.  His  rival's  elevation  was  in  every  way 
the  reverse.  The  only  possible  ground  on  which 
Novatian  could  maintain  himself  was  that  by  laxity 
of  discipline  the  leaders  of  the  Church  had  aposta- 
tized.    The  "  faithful  city  "  had  "  become  a  harlot." 


Novatianist  Idea  of  the  Church.  383 

It  remained  to  gather  out  of  the  ruins  of  a  fallen 
Church  a  congregation  of  faithful  men.  That  plea 
was  everywhere  rejected1  by  the  main  body  of  the 
Church  with  scorn,  but  Novatian  had  not  altogether 
miscalculated  the  force  of  it.  Though  the  move- 
ment was  everywhere  treated  as  a  schism,  it  had 
everywhere  its  adherents.  It  covered  the  Church's 
territory  with  its  rival  bishops.  It  lived  and  grew. 
It  brought  to  an  issue  a  question  which  had  been 
long  dividing  men :  Is  the  Church  a  museum  for  the 
preservation  of  saints  ?  or  a  hospital  for  the  cure  of 
sinners?  Novatian  aimed  to  provide  the  museum. 
He  proposed  to  make  the  Kingdom  of  God  a  field  of 
wheat  without  tares,  a  net  enclosing  none  but  good 
fish.  The  experiment  has  always  failed,  but  there 
has  never  been  a  time  in  history  when  a  strong 
leader  eager  to  try  it  could  not  command  a  con- 
siderable following. 

Such  plantings  are  always  rooted  up  in  time ; 
but  this  schism  lasted  into  the  eighth  century  to  the 
weakening  of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  worst  thing 
that  the  Church  can  suffer  from  a  Puritan  party  is 
to  be  governed  by  it.  The  next  worst  is  to  lose  it 
out  of  the  Church's  fellowship,  and  leave  without 
proper  balance  the  opposite  extreme  of  laxity  and 
lowness  of  standard.  In  that  way  we  may  be  sure 
that  our  Lord's   cause  suffered   loss.     It  has  been 


*At  Antioch  alone  among  the  great  sees  there  was  hesitation. 
The  hishop,  Fabius,  had  Puritan  leanings.  Firrnilian,  bishop  of 
Cappadocian  Csesarea,  Helenus  of  Tarsus,  and  Theoctistus  of 
Csesarea  in  Palestine,  were  arranging  for  a  great  meeting  of  bish- 
ops at  Antioch  to  steady,  if  possible,  their  wavering  brother's 
loyalty,  when  his  death  put  an  end  to  doubt. 


384  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

noted  that  the  movement  was  especially  successful 
in  that  tumultuous,  inconstant  Asia  Minor,  where  so 
many  divisive  movements  had  gathered  force  before. 
It  may  be  taken  as  an  illustration  of  a  pitiful  law, — 
the  more  the  Church  is  divided  in  any  community, 
the  easier  it  is  to  make  more  divisions.  Division 
may  be  a  duty.  It  is  always  an  evil.  Its  worst  evil 
is  that  it  tends  to  utter  disintegration.  It  was  so  in 
Asia  Minor.  It  is  so  in  America.  And  what  is  our 
gain?  Probably  no  serious  historian  supposes  that 
the  Church  of  the  third  century  was  abetter  Church 
for  being  divided  into  a  Puritan  and  a  Catholic 
Communion.1 

When  the  news  of  this  schism  reached  Carthage, 
Cyprian  was  profoundly  moved.  He  cannot  have 
had  any  doubt  as  to  the  line  which  the  bishops  in 
council  would  take,  but  he  knew  the  strength  of  the 
Puritan  party,  and  he  looked  with  utter  horror  on 
the  prospect  of  a  division  of  Christians  into  rival 
camps.  He  brought  his  eloquence  to  bear  upon  the 
situation  by  means  of  an  oration  before  the  council, 
shortly  published  as  a  treatise,  On  the  Unity  of  the 
Church  (Be  Unitate  Ecclesice).  He  urges  upon  his 
hearers  that  the  Church  is  confronted  by  a  great 
new  danger.     As  heathenism   begins  to  fall  before 

1  At  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Nicaea  it  was  felt  that  Catholics 
and  Novatiaus,  holding  a  common  faith,  ought  to  unite  in  defend- 
ing it  against  Arian  innovations.  The  emperor  invited  Ace- 
sius,  an  eminent  Novatianist  bishop,  who  came  and  assented  to 
the  decisions  about  matters  of  faith.  Constantine  urged  that  this 
was  a  time  wheo  the  old  division  ought  to  be  healed.  In  vain. 
Acesius  refused  inflexibly  to  communicate  with  a  Church  of  sin- 
ners. The  emperor  turned  upon  him  with  a  sudden  flash  of  hu- 
mor,— "Set  up  a  ladder,  Acesius,  and  climb  into  heaven  by 
yourself." 


The   Church  Must  be   One.  385 

the  Kingdom  of  God,  the  evil  powers  are  preparing 
to  tempt  men  more  subtly  by  imitations  of  the  Holy 
Kingdom  itself.  They  will  be  deceived  by  false 
shows  of  goodness,  by  goodness  that  really  displays 
every  virtue  save  the  one  essential  virtue  of  obedi- 
ence to  the  will  of  God.  Let  no  one  suppose  that  a 
separation  from  the  Catholic  Church  is  an  innocent 
thing  because  "  confessors  "  have  part  in  it.  Good 
men  may  fall,  but  separation  cannot  be  innocent. 
The  Church  of  Christ  is  one,  it  ought  to  be  one, 
it  cannot  be  anything  else  but  one.  "  Part  a  ray  of 
the  sun  from  its  orb,  and  its  unity  forbids  this  divi- 
sion of  light ;  break  a  branch  from  the  tree,  once 
broken,  it  can  bud  no  more ;  cut  the  stream  from  its 
fountain,  the  remnant  will  be  dried  up.  Thus  the 
Church,  flooded  with  the  light  of  the  Lord,  puts  forth 
her  rays  through  the  whole  world,  with  yet  one 
light.  She  stretcheth  forth  her  branches  over  the 
universal  earth,  in  the  riches  of  plenty,  and  pours 
abroad  her  bounteous  flowing  streams ;  yet  is  there 
one  head,  one  source,  one  Mother,  abundant  in  the 
results  of  her  fruitfulness  "  (v.).  "  He  can  no  longer 
have  God  for  a  Father,  who  has  not  the  Church  for 
a  Mother.  If  any  man  was  able  to  escape  who  re- 
mained without  the  Ark  of  Noah,  then  will  that 
man  escape  who  is  out  of  doors  beyond  the  Church  " 
(vi.).  Our  Lord's  coat  was  seamless,  "an  inviolate 
and  individual  robe."  "  He  cannot  own  Christ's 
garment,  who  splits  and  divides  Christ's  Church." 
"  When  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  were  rent  asun- 
der, the  prophet  Ahijah  rent  his  garment.  But  be- 
cause   Christ's   people    cannot    be    rent,    His    coat 

y 


386  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

woven  and  conjoined  throughout,  was  not  divided 
by  those  it  fell  to  "  (vii.).  Some  appealed  to  the 
promise  to  the  "  two  or  three  "  gathered  in  the 
Lord's  Name.  They  deceitfully  suppress,  says 
Cyprian,  the  verse  immediately  preceding  their 
Text, — If  two  of  you  shall  agree  on  earth,  .  .  .  it 
shall  be  given  you.  "  He  places  agreement  first. 
Hearts  at  peace  are  the  first  condition.  He  teaches 
that  we  must  agree  together  faithfully  and  firmly. 
Yet  how  can  he  be  said  to  be  at  agreement  with 
other,  who  is  at  disagreement  with  the  Church  it- 
self, and  with  the  universal  brotherhood  "  (xii.)  ? 

Two  criticisms  have  been  brought  against  the  De 
Unitate  unjustly.  It  has  been  said  to  present  a 
novel  theory  of  the  Church  as  a  single,  indivisible, 
world-wide  organization,  or  rather  organism,  a  theory 
invented  by  Cyprian  for  the  occasion,  to  save  the 
Church  from  the  evils  of  disruption.  He  believed 
it  honestly  enough,  men  say,  when  it  occurred  to 
him,  but  it  had  never  occurred  to  him  before.  If  any 
one  cares  to  look  into  this  matter,  it  is  well  discussed 
in  Archbishop  Benson's  Cyprian,  pp.  186-191,  where 
it  is  abundantly  shown  that  this  theory  of  a  Catholic 
Church  is  one  that  Cyprian  had  held  from  the  be- 
ginning of  his  Christian  career,  and  that  it  is  older 
than  Cyprian  himself.  The  second  criticism  main- 
tains that  Cyprian's  theory  of  a  Catholic  Church 
leads  logically  to  the  Roman  system  as  its  result. 
Doubtless  the  Roman  Communion  has  greatly  prof- 
ited at  times  by  proclaiming  Cyprian's  doctrine  that 
there  can  be  but  one  Church,  and  adding  to  it  an 
important  proviso,  to   which   Cyprian    would   never 


Cyprian's  Idea  of  the  Episcopate.  387 

have  given  his  adhesion,  that  if  the  Church  is  fatally 
rent  in  twain,  the  part  which  has  an  enormous  ma- 
jority in  mere  numbers  must  of  course  be  the  true 
Body  of  Christ.  But  that  is  no  fair  outcome  of 
Cyprian's  teaching  at  all.  In  fact  Cyprian's  idea  of 
the  maintaining  of  unity  is  just  the  opposite  of  the 
Roman  idea. 

For  the  great  Roman  idea  of  settling  controversy 
and  saving  unity  is  that  all  the  rest  of  the  Christian 
world  should  submit  to  the  guidance  of  the  bishop 
of  Rome.  Cyprian  not  only  does  not  foresee  the 
necessity  for  such  a  government  of  the  Church,  he 
provides  beforehand  against  the  possibility  of  it. 
44  There  is  one  episcopate,"  he  says  {Letter  li.  24), 
44  diffused  through  the  harmonious  multitude  of 
many  bishops,"  and  in  the  Be  Unitate  (v.),  44  The 
episcopate  is  one,  it  is  a  whole  in  which  each  enjoys 
full  possession."  His  Latin  phrase  runs  thus, 44  Epis- 
copatus  units  est,  cvjns  a  singulis  in  solidum  pars  tene- 
tur"  The  idea  is  that  the  authority  of  each  bishop 
is,  as  Dr.  Benson  puts  it,  44a  tenure  on  a  totality." 
One  might  use  a  more  familiar  law  term,  and  render 
the  phrase,  "  The  episcopate  is  a  single  property,  in 
which  each  holder  owns  one  undivided  part."  A 
bishop  might  be,  must  be,  put  out  of  his  office  by  ac- 
tion of  his  peers,  if  he  were  found  guilty  of  heresy  or 
immorality.  As  long  as  he  retained  his  office,  how- 
ever, he  held  it  as  the  direct  representative  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  he  was  responsible  for  his 
administration  of  it  to  Him  alone.  If  great  ques- 
tions came  up  in  an  episcopal  council,  a  majority  of 
votes  could  not  override  a  minority.     If  even  in  the 


388  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

greatest  practical  questions,  after  ninety-nine  bishops 
had  agreed  in  adopting  a  rule  of  action,  one  single 
bishop  dissented  from  it,  he  was  at  liberty,  in  Cy- 
prian's idea,  to  rule  his  diocese  in  his  own  way.  He 
was  only  not  at  liberty  to  break  away  from  the  fel- 
lowship of  his  brethren,  nor  they  from  him.  If  one 
bishop — for  instance,  the  bishop  of  Rome — excom- 
municated another  bishop  because  of  a  difference  in 
practice,  the  excommunicator  excommunicated  only 
himself.  Rome  would  save  unity  through  uniformity 
by  having  all  bishops  submit  to  one.  Cyprian  would 
save  unity  through  free  diversity,  by  having  all  bishops 
respect  one  another's  high  responsibility,  and  simply 
agree  to  disagree.  Even  bishops  in  council  did  but 
give  advice  and  come  to  agreements.  They  did  not 
pretend  to  be  able  to  make  laws,  for  a  bishop  was 
subject  only  to  Jesus  Christ. 

Yet  Roman  authors  quote  very  striking  testimonies 
from  Cyprian,  some  of  which  he  really  wrote.  Does 
he  not  say  that  the  unity  of  the  Church  begins  from 
Peter  and  from  Peter's  see  ?  Well,  no  !  Not  in  the 
modern  Roman  sense.  What  he  does  say  is  that  our 
Lord  gave  the  keys  to  St.  Peter  first  to  show  by  a 
s}rmbolic  action  that  the  Church  was  to  be  one,  and 
its  authority  a  single,  undivided  authority  every- 
where. Then  He  gave  precisely  the  same  gift  to  all 
the  Apostles  alike.  "  On  him  being  one  He  builds 
His  Church,  and  though  He  gives  to  all  the  Apostles 
an  equal  power,  and  says,  As  My  Father  hath  sent  Me, 
.  .  .  yet  in  order  to  manifest  unity,  He  has  by 
His  own  authority  so  placed  the  source  of  the  same 
unity  as  to  begin  from  one.      Certainly  the  other 


A  Forger  Enlarges    Cyprian.  389 

Apostles  were  what  Peter  was,  endued  with  an  equal 
fellowship  both  of  honor  and  of  power,  but  a  com- 
mencement is  made  from  unity,  that  the  Church  may 
be  set  before  us  as  one."  "  He  who  holds  not  this 
unity  of  the  Church,  does  he  think  that  he  holds  the 
faith  ?  "  So  Cyprian  goes  on  presently.  "  He  who 
strives  against  and  resists  the  Church,  is  he  assured 
that  he  is  in  the  Church?  " 

But  let  it  be  well  observed  that  no  superior  power 
is  asserted  as  having  been  given  to  St.  Peter  above 
other  Apostles.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  distinctly 
set  down  that  they  have  in  every  way  as  much  as  he. 
He  is  the  symbol,  not  the  necessary  centre,  of  the 
unity  of  authority  in  the  Church.  Just  because  this 
language  was  not  satisfactory  to  the  advocates  of 
later  Roman  claims,  a  forger  added  certain  telling 
phrases  to  this  passage.  After  "  a  commencement 
is  made  from  unity,"  he  added,  "  and  primacy  is 
given  to  Peter,  that  the  Church  may  be  set  forth  as 
one,  and  the  see  as  one.  And  they  all  are  shepherds, 
yet  the  flock  is  shown  to  be  one,  such  as  to  be  fed 
by  all  the  Apostles  with  unanimous  agreement." 
Again,  after  "  He  who  strives  against  and  resists  the 
Church,"  is  added,  "  He  who  deserts  the  See  of 
Peter,  on  whom  the  Church  is  founded."  These  ad- 
ditions— the  proof  that  they  are  forgeries  is  over- 
whelming— mark  just  the  difference  between  the 
Cyprianic  view  and  the  Roman.  In  the  late  Roman 
view  bishops  must  govern  their  churches  "by  unani- 
mous agreement "  ;  in  the  Cyprianic,  they  are  free 
to  differ.  In  the  Roman  view,  leaving  the  Chair  of 
Peter  is  separating  one's  self  from  the  Church  ;  we 


390  The  Post-Apostolic  A<je. 

shall  presently  find  Cyprian  separating  himself  from 
the  Roman  bishop  in  a  great  matter,  and  taking  the 
ground  that  if  he  is  excommunicated  for  it,  the  Ro- 
man bishop  will  be  the  only  one  hurt.1 

There  is  no  support  for  modern  Roman  theories  in 
Cyprian.  Nevertheless,  he  has  two  radical  errors 
which  must  here  be  pointed  out.  The  first  is  his 
idea  that  the  Church  cannot  by  any  possibility  be 
divided,  Alas !  it  can  be.  History  has  refuted 
him.  Even  Roman  theory  acknowledges  the 
Churches  of  Greece  and  Russia  and  the  East  as  part 
of  the  Church  of  Christ,  though  separated  from  the 
Church  of  Rome.  All  modern  Christianity  has  been 
forced  to  see  that  the  Church  may  be  divided  into 
churches,  however  much  it  may  be  a  sin  so  to  divide 
it,  or  to  hold  the  fragments  apart.  Furthermore,  the 
Roman  and  Anglican  Communions  hold  that  every 
person  who  has  received  Christian  baptism  is  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  whether  he  is 
or  is  not  in  fellowship  with  any  particular  ecclesi- 

1One  favorite  Roman  quotation  from  Cyprian  is  drawn  from 
his  letter  (liv.)  to  Cornelius  of  Rome,  in  which  he  speaks  of  the 
party  of  Felicissimus  and  Fortunatus  as  daring  to  make  an  appeal 
"  ad  cathedram  Petri  atque  ad  ecclesiam  principalem,  unde  unitas 
sacerdotalis  exorta  estf," — "to  the  chair  of  Peter  and  the  original 
Church  from  which  the  priestly  unity  took  its  rise."  Here  unitas 
sacerdotalis  means  "  our  united  body  of  bishops,"  "  sacerdos  "  be- 
ing used  of  bishops  only  at  that  time.  Principalis  does  not  mean 
"principal"  in  Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  but  "original,"  "primi- 
tive." Finally,  Cyprian  does  not  say  "  takes  its  rise,"  but  "took 
its  rise."  He  is  not  setting  down  the  See  of  Rome  as  a  perpetual 
fountain  of  life  and  power  to  the  rest  of  the  Church,  but  simply 
as  the  Church  from  which  the  first  bishops  were  consecrated  for 
North  Africa,  the  source  from  which  they  derived  their  episcopal 
succession.  "Our  bishops,"  he  would  say,  "have  a  peculiar 
right  to  the  sympathy  and  support  of  the  Church  from  which  our 
episcopate  sprang,  as  against  seceders  who  have  simply  stolen 
this  gift  of  power  out  of  the  Church's  keeping." 


Can  Bad  Men  Do   God's  Works?  391 

astical  organization.  In  that  sense  the  Church  is 
one  and  indivisible.  There  is  but  one  Church  of 
Christ,  and  one  door  of  entrance  into  it.  But  when 
Cyprian  preached  that  dividing  the  Church  was  de- 
stroying the  Church,  that,  for  one  party  or  the  other, 
schism  meant  death,  he  preached  a  warning  that  was 
not  true. 

The  other  capital  error  in  Cyprian's  theory  of  the 
Church  is  the  idea  that  personal  un worthiness  in 
God's  ministers  vitiates  their  official  acts.  It  comes 
out  plainly  in  his  letter  (lxiii.)  to  the  Christians  of 
Assuras,  whose  former  bishop  had  apostatized,  and 
now  was  claiming  his  old  place  again.  "Neither 
can  the  oblation  be  consecrated  where  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  not,"  is  Cyprian's  argument,  "  nor  does  the 
Lord  grant  grace  to  any  through  the  prayers  and 
supplications  of  one  who  has  himself  done  violence 
to  the  Lord."  1  This  seems  to  be  the  ground  of  his 
idea  that  schismatics  cannot  be  a  part  of  the  Church. 
His  argument  would  run  in  this  way.  Schism  is  a 
great  sin.  But  a  man  who  is  living  in  great  sin  can 
do  no  divine  act.  Then  a  man  fallen  into  schism 
can  no  longer  baptize  or  celebrate  the  Eucharist,  con- 
firm, or  ordain.  There  is  no  power  left  among  such 
people  to  continue  the  Church's  life.  Hence  his 
terrible  accusation  in  the  Be  Unitate.     "  They  think 

1  Archbishop  Benson  acquits  Cyprian  of  this  error  on  p.  415 
of  his  hook, — "In  Cyprian  .  .  .  there  is  no  trace  of  such 
teaching  as  that  the  moral  character  of  the  priest  affects  the  va- 
lidity of  the  Sacrament."  But  on  p.  232  we  read  of  "  Cyprian, 
whose  characteristic  mistake  was  to  consider  every  office  of  a 
Church  vitiated  to  nullity,  if  discharged  by  an  unworthy  minister." 
How  to  reconcile  these  two  statements  the  present  writer  knows 
not,  but  he  feels  constrained  to  take  the  latter  one  as  representing 
Cyprian's  real  mind. 


392  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

that  they  can  baptize.  .  .  .  Men  are  not  cleansed 
by  them,  but  rather  made  foul,  nor  their  sins  purged 
away,  but  rather  heaped  up.  It  is  a  birth  that  gives 
children  not  to  God,  but  to  the  :  evil."  Out  of  this 
idea,  that  separatists  cannot  baptize,  came  shortly 
the  great  controversy  not  only  ol  Cyprian's  life,  but 
of  the  third  Christian  century. 

The  next  three  years  are  demoted  to  practical 
matters.  The  bishops  are  invitee,  to  meet  in  council 
at  Carthage  once  or  twice  a  year,  and  on  these  oc- 
casions, or  in  correspondence  in  the  intervals,  all 
men's  difficulties  are  brought  to  Cyprian  for  settle- 
ment. His  letters  and  the  treatises  that  come 
pouring  from  his  facile  pen  set  the  Church  life  of 
Carthage  vividly  before  us.  Thus  he  writes  a  letter 
(lxii.)  to  Csecilius,  senior  bishop  of  the  province,  to 
complain  that  certain  bishops  have  used  water  in- 
stead of  wine  in  the  Eucharist.  The  Eucharistic  Cup 
must  be  like  our  Lord's  at  the  Passover  Supper,  a 
cup  of  wine  mixed  with  water.  "  Water  alone  can- 
not be  offered,  even  as  wine  alone  cannot  be  offered." 
The  union  of  the  water  and  the  wine  is  to  Cyprian's 
mind  a  symbol  of  the  union  of  Christ  and  His 
people.  "The  cup  of  the  Lord  is  not,  indeed,  water 
alone,  nor  wine  alone,  unless  each  be  mingled  with 
the  other."  This  shrinking  from  wine  was  due 
solely  to  people's  fear  of  being  detected  as  Christians 
from  having  the  scent  of  wine  on  their  lips  in  the 
early  morning.  That,  Cyprian  says,  is  only  being 
ashamed  of  Christ. 

Again,  he  is  consulted  by  a  bishop,  Fidus,  who 
wishes  that  a  rule  might  be  made  forbidding  the 


Infant  and  Clinic  Baptisms.  393 

baptism  of  infants  within  eight  days  from  birth. 
Cyprian  brings  the  subject  before  his  third  Council 
in  September,  253,  and  of  sixty-six  bishops  present 
not  one  agrees  with  Fidus.  Cyprian  writes  to  him 
(lviii.),  that  nothing  which  God  has  made  can  be 
called  unclean, — Fidus  had  objected  to  giving  the 
kiss  of  the  newly  baptized  to  an  infant  so  shortly 
after  its  birth, — "  and  by  us  no  one  ought  to  be 
hindered  from  baptism  and  the  grace  of  God."  The 
question  whether  the  baptism  of  sick  persons  by 
mere  "  sprinkling  "  can  be  valid,  is  raised  by  a  lay- 
man, Magnus,  and  is  answered  in  the  affirmative 
(lxxv.).  "In  the  Sacrament  of  Salvation  the  con- 
tagion of  sins  is  not  in  such  wise  washed  away  as  the 
filth  of  the  skin  and  the  body  is  washed  away  in  the 
carnal,  ordinary  washing,  so  that  there  should  be 
need  of  saltpetre  and  other  appliances  also,  and  a 
bath  and  a  basin." 

Then  come  matters  of  another  kind.  The  Berber 
tribes  press  in  from  the  mountains  on  the  south,  and 
carry  a  multitude  of  Christians  into  captivity,  a 
captivity  which  is  likely  to  be  worse  than  death. 
Cyprian  appeals  to  his  people  for  contributions  in 
the  way  of  ransom.  The  sixty-six  bishops  of  the 
third  council  add  a  small  offering,  and  Cyprian  sends 
to  the  bishops  of  the  eight  "  parishes "  which  had 
suffered  this  loss,  the  sum  of  100,000  sesterces,1  to  be 
applied  at  their  discretion. 

1The  sestertius  is  one-fourth  of  a  denarius,  which  latter  is  the 
11  penny  "  of  our  New  Testaments.  The  denarius  equals  seventeen 
cents,  eight  and  a  half  d.  English,  not  seven  aud  a  half  d.,  as  in 
the  margin  of  our  Bibles.  The  sum  mentioned  above  is  over 
$4,000  in  American  money,  and  represents  perhaps  five  times  that 
in  what  it  would  do,  and  in  what  it  was  to  give. 


394  The  Post-Apostolic  Aye. 

But  already,  in  the  year  252,  Carthage  itself  had 
suffered  an  invasion  more  terrible  than  even  a  Berber 
raid.  The  plague  was  desolating  the  luxurious  city. 
This  horrible  visitation, — a  sort  of  malignant  typhoid 
fever,  it  would  seem,  but  of  a  pestilential  power  dif- 
ficult for  a  modern  reader  to  conceive, — appeared 
first  from  ^Ethiopia  in  250,  and  ranged  up  and  down 
the  Roman  Empire  for  some  twenty  years.  Alex- 
andria is  held  by  Gibbon  to  have  lost  half  its  in- 
habitants in  a  second  visitation  between  261  and 
265.  Rome  knew  5,000  deaths  in  one  day  in  262. 
A  Gothic  invasion  was  broken  up  by  the  disease  in 
Thrace  in  270,  but  ten  years  earlier  the  armies  of 
Valerian  had  been  so  weakened  by  it  as  to  open  the 
way  for  the  conquering  advance  of  Sapor.  Wher- 
ever this  pestilence  raged,  heathen  men  were  utterly 
demoralized  by  it.  It  visited  every  house,  it  was 
horribly  fatal,  and  even  where  life  was  spared,  it  left 
prostration,  deafness,  blindness,  as  its  results.  The 
rich  fled  in  every  direction.  The  abandoned  houses 
were  plundered  by  thieves  unchecked.  Men  threw 
their  sick  into  the  streets  to  die  in  their  panic  fear. 
The  dead  lay  unboried,  to  the  horrible  increase  of 
the  infection.  Not  a  hospital,  it  may  be  noted,  was 
known  to  the  Roman  Empire,  till  after  the  Empire 
became  Christian.  In  such  conditions  Cyprian 
gathered  a  mass-meeting  of  Christians,  and  delivered 
such  an  address  as  would  have  converted  the  whole 
heathen  population,  if  they  could  have  heard  it.  At 
least,  so  thought  the  deacon  Pontius.  The  whole 
Church  of  Carthage  was  to  be  organized  as  a  sort  of 
Red  Cross  Society,  to  nurse  the  sick,  to  care  for  the 


Respondere  Natalibus.  395 

orphans,  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  helpless  poor,  to 
bury  the  dead.  That  was  Cyprian's  plan,  and  he 
seems  to  have  had  a  large  measure  of  success.  4"  We 
should  answer  to  our  birth-privileges,"  was  his 
splendid  phrase,  quoted  for  us  by  Pontius.  Re- 
spondere Natalibus  !  It  is  his  nobler  way  of  express- 
ing what  is  familiar  to  us  in  the  French  "  Noblesse 
oblige."  The  children  of  a  Divine  Father  must  live 
divinely.1 

But  the  mass  of  men,  even  of  Christian  men,  need 
leadership  in  times  of  trial.  If  they  are  to  endure 
horrors,  and  do  noble  deeds  at  the  same  time,  they 
must  have  some  one  to  teach  them  forcibly  the  reasons 
for  such  behaviour.  Cyprian  interpreted  the  situation 
created  by  the  pestilence  in  three  treatises.  The  Ad 
Demetrianum  (Address  to  Demetriaii)  is  an  appeal 
against  heathen  misconceptions.  Demetrian,  once  an 
enquirer,  was  now  a  leader  in  stirring  up  persecu- 
tion. Such  men  found  in  natural  convulsions,  crop- 
failures,  pestilence,  such  as  the  Empire  had  lately 
experienced,  visitations  from  offended  gods,  angry 
that  Christians  had  been  spared  so  long  to  defy 
them.  Cyprian  returns  answer  that  it  is  a  visitation 
from  the  true  God,  and  in  behalf  of  Christians,  not 
against  them.  Is  he  reminded  that  Christians  feel 
the  same  stroke  ?  He  answers  that  the  power  of 
punishment  lies  in  the  suffering  that  men  feel  under 
it,  and  Christians,  who  know  that  death  is  gain,  live 
calm  and  undisturbed  amid  horrors  which  madden 

1  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  gives  a  striking  picture  of  the  be- 
haviour of  heathen  and  Christian  in  his  plague-stricken  city.  In- 
teresting for  reference,  but  too  long  for  quotation,  it  may  be  found 
in  Eusebius  (vii.  22). 


The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


and  brutalize  their  adversaries.  He  closes  with  a 
terrible  denunciation  of  the  wrath  to  come,  when 
"  souls  with  their  bodies  will  be  saved  unto  suffer- 
ing in  tortures  infinite.  There  that  man  will  be  seen 
by  us  for  ever  who  made  us  his  spectacle  for  a  sea- 
son here.  What  brief  enjoyment  those  cruel  eyes 
received  from  persecutions  wrought  upon  us,  will  be 
balanced  against  a  spectacle  eternal."  "  We  may  not 
hate,"  says  Cyprian,  and  he  implores  his  foe  to  come 
and  be  saved  while  there  is  yet  time,  but  there  seems 
to  be  an  un-Christlike  readiness  to  enjoy  the  sight  of 
never-ending  torment.  The  Church  of  our  age  may 
well  correct  its  opinions  sometimes  by  those  of  a 
Church  which  lived  so  much  nearer  to  the  teachings 
of  Jesus  Christ.  But  the  Church  of  to-day,  after  all 
these  ages  of  Christian  experience,  ought  to  be  much 
nearer  to  our  Lord's  heart,  better  able  to  represent 
and  imitate  His  feeling,  than  great  saints  of  sixteen 
centuries  ago. 

A  finer  feeling  is  shown  in  the  De  Mortalitate 
[Concerning  the  Mortality),  which  speaks  directly  to 
the  Christian  of  the  meaning  of  all  this  experience 
to  himself.  "  Dearest  brethren,"  is  its  word  to  all 
such,  "  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  has  begun  to  be  nigh 
at  hand.  Reward  of  life,  and  joy  of  eternal  sal- 
vation, and  perpetual  happiness,  and  possession  of 
Paradise  lately  lost,  already,  while  the  world  passes 
away,  are  coming  nigh.  Already  heavenly  things 
are  succeeding  to  earthly,  and  great  to  small,  and 
eternal  to  transient.  What  place  is  there  for 
anxiety  and  solicitude  ?  "  Death  is  better  than  life. 
Death  is  safety,  death  is  rest.     If  the  Christian  suf- 


Our  Dead  not  Lost.  397 

fers  painfully  before  he  is  called  away,  it  is  his  prep- 
aration for  a  crown.  If  we  have  to  part  with  our 
nearest  and  dearest,  while  we  ourselves  live  on,  we 
know  that  they  are  "  not  lost,  but  gone  before," — non 
eos  amitti,  sed  prcemitti  is  Cyprian's  phrase, — "  and 
we  ought  to  miss  them  rather  than  mourn  them,  and 
not  be  putting  on  black  garments  here,  when  there 
they  are  already  clothed  in  white."  "  Paradise  we 
are  to  reckon  as  our  fatherland.  It  is  a  large  and 
loving  company  who  expect  us  there,  parents, 
brothers,  children,  a  manifold  and  numerous  as- 
semblage longing  after  us,  who  having  security  of 
their  own  immortality,  still  feel  anxiety  for  our  sal- 
vation. .  .  .  There  is  the  glorious  company  of 
the  Apostles;  there  is  the  assembly  of  Prophets  ex- 
ulting; there  is  the  innumerable  multitude  of 
Martyrs,1  crowned  after  their  victory  of  strife  and 
passion,  there  are  Virgins  triumphant;  .  .  . 
there  are  merciful  men  obtaining  mercy ;  .  .  .  . 
To  these,  dearest  brethren,  let  us  hasten.  Let  it  be 
the  portion  which  we  desire,  speedily  to  be  among 
them,  speedily  to  be  gone  to  Christ." 

A  third  treatise,  De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis  ( Of  Work 
and.  Almsdeeds)  rounds  out  the  teachings  of  Cyprian 
in  this  time  of  distress.  Amid  awful  sickness  and 
death,  confusion,  terror,  pillage,  and  a  very  frenzy 
of  selfishness  on  every  side,  the  bishop  of  the  Chris- 

1  Cyprian's  phrases  here, — "  Jpostolorum  gloriosus  chorus ;  Pro- 
phetarum  exultantium  numerus  ;  Marty  rum  innumerabilis  populus, " — 
seem  to  have  suggested  those  verses  of  the  Te  Deum, 

"  Te  gloriosus  Apostolorum  chorus, 

u  Te  Prophetarum  laudahilis  numerus, 

"  Te  Martyrum  candidatus  laudat  exercitus." 


398  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


tians  lifts  np  his  voice  to  remind  men  how  many  and 
great  are  the  divine  benefits, — "  that  the  Father  sent 
the  Son  to  preserve  us  and  give  us  life,  that  He 
might  restore  us,  and  that  the  Son  was  sent,  and 
willed  to  be  called  the  Son  of  Man,  that  He  might 
make  us  sons  of  God ;  humbled  Himself,  that  He 
might  upraise  a  race  which  before  was  fallen ;  was 
wounded,  that  He  might  heal  our  wounds ;  served, 
that  He  might  ransom  to  liberty  them  that  were  in 
servitude ;  endured  to  die,  that  He  might  give  to 
mortals  the  boon  of  immortalit}^."  Such  benefits 
must  be  met  in  a  corresponding  temper.  The  idea 
of  Respondere  Natalibus  is  at  work  in  Cyprian's 
mind.  The  Lord,  the  Teacher  of  our  life,  he  saj's, 
enjoins  nothing  more  frequently  in  the  Gospel  than 
almsgiving.  Then  the  excuses  of  Christians  are 
considered  one  by  one,  and  pungently  answered.  Let 
men  face  the  real  fact  behind  all  their  flimsy  argu- 
ments against  generosity.  It  is  simply  that  they 
are  living  in  darkness,  where  the  vision  of  Christ  is 
not  seen.  The  great  underlying  thought  which 
Cyprian  brings  out  at  last  as  his  climax,  is  that  the 
possessions  which  God  allows  to  each  of  us  are  given 
for  the  benefit  of  all  in  His  Kingdom.  "  Day  gives 
its  light  equally,  the  sun  its  radiance,  showers  their 
moisture,  and  wind  its  breath.  There  is  one  sleep 
to  the  slumbering,  and  stars  have  a  common  lustre. 
In  which  example  of  equality  the  earthly  possessor 
who  shares  his  gains  and  fruits  with  the  brotherhood, 
free  and  just  in  his  voluntary  bounties,  is  an  imitator 
of  God  the  Father." 

Yet  here  also   is  one  of  the  great  bishop's  weak- 


Stephen  Becomes  Bishop  of  Rome.  399 


nesses.     He  had  read  in  Prov.  xvi.  6,  By  almsgiving 

and  faith  sins  are  purged,  and  in  Ecclesiasticus  iii.  30, 
As  water  extinguished  fire,  so  almsgiving  quencheth  sin. 
If  he  had  meant  no  more  than  that  the  cultivation  of 
healthy  habits  in  the  soul  tends  to  drive  out  un- 
healthy ones,  all  would  have  been  well.  Such 
preaching  is  much  needed  now  among  a  people 
frightened  away  from  attaching  any  just  value  to 
Christlike  deeds.  But  it  must  be  acknowledged 
that  Cyprian  seems  really  to  have  meant  more.  He 
seems  to  teach  that  after  a  man  has  once  been  ad- 
mitted by  free  grace  into  a  state  of  salvation,  then 
in  the  process  of  his  development  his  good  deeds  may 
somehow  go  to  balance  up  his  bad  ones.  That  opens 
the  door  for  a  good  deal  of  bad  theology  and  bad 
practice.  But  admitting,  and  regretting,  that  slip, 
one  may  find  much  that  is  inspiring  in  the  Be  Opere. 

A  treatise  on  the  Lord's  Prayer  contains  much 
that  is  interesting,  but  it  must  be  passed  by.  We 
must  hasten  on  to  a  great  turning-point  in  Cyprian's 
life,  which  brings  him  into  curiously  changed  re- 
lations with  the  See  of  Rome.  His  old  ally  Cornelius 
died  in  exile  at  CentumcellaB,  now  Civita  Vecchia,  in 
June,  253,  and  was  succeeded  by  Lucius,  who  sat 
but  eight  months  and  ten  days  in  the  Roman  chair. 
In  May,  254,  Stephen  was  chosen  bishop,  and  Stephen 
and  Cyprian  were  men  foredoomed  to  clash. 

The  first  matters  that  divided  them  came  in  the 
form  of  appeals  from  foreign  Churches.  A  foreign 
Church  in  any  trouble  or  perplexity  naturally  ap- 
pealed to  its  greater  neighbors  for  help.  Carthage 
and  Rome  were  both,  and  equally,  appealed  to  by 


400  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 


the  clergy  and  laity  of  Legio  and  Emerita,  now 
Leon  and  Merida,  in  Spain.  Their  former  bishops, 
Basilides  and  Martial,  had  both  lapsed  in  a  former 
persecution,  had  been  deposed,  and  even  excommu- 
nicated. They  had  accepted  their  sentences,  and 
new  bishops  had  been  elected  and  consecrated  in 
their  places.  Of  late  they  had  roused  themselves 
from  their  dejection,  had  claimed  their  old  positions, 
and  Basilides  at  any  rate  had  made  a  journey  to 
Rome,  and  there  made  such  representations  that 
Stephen  had  admitted  him  to  communion,  and  sent 
to  the  Spanish  Churches  a  direction,  request,  counsel, 
— we  know  not  what, — that  Basilides  and  Martial  be 
in  all  respects  restored.  This  subject  coming  before 
Cyprian's  fifth  Council  of  Carthage,  in  September, 
254,  the  thirty-seven  bishops  joined  in  a  letter 
(lxvii.)  in  which  they  assure  the  Spanish  Churches 
that  they  ought  not  to  give  way  for  a  moment. 
Sabinus  had  been  elected  bishop  of  Legio  in  a  per- 
fectly regular  way,  "so  that  by  the  suffrage  of  the 
whole  brotherhood,  and  by  the  sentence  of  the 
bishops  who  had  assembled  in  their  presence,  and  of 
those  who  had  written  to  you  concerning  him,  the 
episcopate  was  conferred  upon  him,  and  hands  were 
imposed  on  him,  in  the  place  of  Basilides."  "  Nor 
can  it  rescind  an  ordination  rightly  perfected,"  so 
the  African  bishops  go  on  to  say,  "  that  Bas- 
ilides .  .  .  went  to  Rome,  and  deceived  Stephen, 
our  colleague,  placed  at  a  distance,  and  ignorant  of 
what  had  been  done  and  of  the  truth,  into  canvass- 
ing that  he  might  be  replaced  unjustly  in  the  epis- 
copate from  which  he  had  been  righteously  deposed." 


An  Appeal  from  Gaul.  401 

In  short,  the  Spanish  Churches  are  urged  to  dis- 
regard entirely  the  opinions,  wishes,  decisions  of  the 
Roman  See. 

From  Gaul  comes  in  another  complaint.  Marcian, 
bishop  of  Aries,  is  a  Novatianist.  He  not  only  re- 
fuses the  "  peace  "  to  penitents,  in  cruel  disregard  of 
the  general  agreement  of  the  Churches,  but  he 
acknowledges  Novatian  as  rightful  bishop  of  Rome. 
The  neighboring  bishops  in  Gaul  consider  this  a 
scandal,  and  ask  Cyprian  for  advice  and  help. 
Hence  we  have  a  letter  (lxvi.)  from  Cyprian  to 
Stephen,  telling  the  new  bishop  of  Rome  what  he 
ought  to  do  in  the  matter.  The  "pope  of  Carthage" 
fairly  orders  his  Roman  brother  to  rouse  himself 
from  negligence  and  play  his  proper  part.  "  It  is 
our  duty,"  says  the  letter,  putting  Carthage  quite  on 
a  level  with  Rome  in  the  matter,  "  It  is  our  dut}r  to 
consider  this  affair,  and  to  remedy  it,"  and  again, 
"It  is  for  this  end,  dearest  brother,  that  the  body  of 
the  bishops  is  great  and  generously  multiplied,1  knit 
fast  with  glue  of  mutual  concord  and  bond  of  unity, 
that  so,  should  any  of  our  college  attempt  the  form- 
ing of  a  heresy,  the  rending  and  wasting  of  Christ's 
flock,  the  rest  may  come  to  the  rescue."  Cyprian 
holds  that  the  backing  up  of  a  right  discipline  in 
Gaul  is  a  duty  laid  upon  all  neighboring  bishops, 
and  he  urges  the  Roman  bishop  to  be  their  spokes- 
man, not  because  he  is  any  more  than  any  other 
bishop,  but  because  he  is  bishop  of  the  nearest  great 

1  Magnum  et  copiosum."  Not  only  is  the  number  absolutely- 
large,  but  the  Church's  needs  are  liberally  and  largely  met. 
Cyprian  believed  in  small  dioceses  and  much  episcopal  super- 
vision. 


402  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Church.  Very  properly  the  bishops  of  Gaul  were 
not  willing  to  depose  Marcian,  and  so  precipitate  a 
great  schism,  until  they  could  be  sure  that  the 
neighboring  Churches  would  back  them  up.  And 
among  these  the  Church  of  the  great  Roman  city 
would  be  the  most  important  of  all.  "  Wherefore," 
says  Cyprian,  "  it  behooves  you  to  write  a  very  full 
letter  to  our  fellow-bishops  established  in  Gaul,  that 
they  no  longer  suffer  Marcian,  forward  and  proud,  an 
enemy  both  to  the  way  of  God  and  to  the  salvation 
of  our  brethren,  to  insult  over  our  college  because 
he  seemeth  as  yet  not  to  be  excommunicated  by 
us.  .  .  .  Let  letters  be  addressed  by  you  to  the 
Province,  and  to  the  people  dwelling  at  Aries,  in 
accordance  with  which  (on  Marcian's  excommuni- 
cation) another  may  be  substituted  in  his  room." 1 
We  must  observe  that  it  is  the  bishops  in  Gaul  who 
are  to  declare  Marcian  excommunicated.  Rome  and 
Carthage  only  promise  to  stand  by  them  and  accept 
their  action  as  just.  Secondly,  it  is  the  people  resid- 
ing at  Aries  who  are  to  elect  a  new  bishop  in 
Marcian's  place,  when  the  bishops  of  the  province 
have  excommunicated  him.  All  that  the  Roman  bishop 
has  to  do  with  it  is  to  send  to  all  parties  concerned 
friendly  letters  urging  them  to  do  their  duty,  just  ex- 
actly as  Cyprian  is  now  writing  his  "  very  full  letter  " 
to  urge  Stephen  himself.     This  is  the  only  explana- 

1  Literae,  quibus,  dbstento  Marciano,  alms  in  loco  ejus  substituatur, 
is  Cyprian's  Latin.  The  translation  "letters  whereby  Marcian 
being  excommunicated,  another  may,"  etc.,  makes  it  look  alto- 
gether too  much  as  if  the  bishop  of  Rome  could  do  all  these  things 
himself.  Cyprian  never  would  have  acknowledged  for  a  moment 
that  the  bishop  of  Rome  could  remove  a  bishop  of  Aries,  or  put  a 
new  bishop  into  that  see  when  vacated. 


Beginning  of  the  Re- Baptism  Controversy.    403 

tion  of  Cyprian's  letter  to  Stephen  which  allows  it 
to  be  consistent  with  Cyprian's  views  as  elsewhere 
expressed. 

Whether  Stephen  took  the  advice  offered  him  from 
Carthage,  whether  the  bishops  of  Gaul  ever  pro- 
ceeded against  Marcian,  we  are  not  informed.  There 
came  up  in  the  following  year,  255,  a  cause  of 
quarrel  which  swallowed  up  all  other  interests  for 
a  time,  the  controversy  about  Re-baptism. 

The  rise  of  a  really  bad  movement  may  be  a  good 
symptom  in  the  Church's  life.  It  was  so  here.  The 
Churches  of  North  Africa  had  been  greatly  stimu- 
lated of  late  years.  The  general  conscience  was 
growing  more  quick  and  tender.  There  was  a 
deepening  desire  to  please  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  a 
deepening  horror  of  the  sin  of  administering  care- 
lessly His  trusts.  Then  some  anxious  souls  raised 
anew  a  question  which  had  before  disturbed 
the  Church  in  Africa.  Could  a  Christian  separated 
by  schism  from  Christ's  Body  administer  a  saving 
baptism  into  that  Body?  "Could  profane  waters 
bless?"  If  persons  came  now  to  the  Catholic 
Church  who  had  been  baptized  by  Novatianists, 
were  they  to  be  regarded  as  baptized  persons,  mem- 
bers already  of  Christ  and  of  His  Church,  brought 
in  through  the  one  door  of  entrance?  or  was  it  to 
be  held  that  such  had  never  been  baptized  at  all,  and 
that  all  the  form  must  be  gone  through  again,  be- 
cause in  schismatic  hands  it  was  a  mere  form,  with 
no  corresponding  power?  Modern  writers  say  that 
Cyprian,  giving  the  answer  that  he  did,  too  much 
lost  sight  of  the  fact  that  Christ  is  the  true  Bap- 


404  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tizer.  Cyprian  himself  would  Lave  replied  to  such 
a  criticism,  "  Christ  is  indeed  the  Baptizer,  but  He 
will  not  stand  to  bless  where  they  who  act  in  His 
Name  are  wilfully  separated  from  His  order.  There 
is  no  magic  in  the  baptismal  water,  nor  in  the  bap- 
tismal words.  He  who  leaves  the  Church  leaves 
Christ,  and  he  who  leaves  Jesus  Christ,  leaves  all 
the  possibility  of  administering  heavenly  powers." 
That  was  Cyprian's  decision.  That  which  heretics 
and  schismatics  offered  as  baptism  was  no  baptism, 
but  an  empty  form.  To  baptize  persons  coming 
from  such  a  form  was  not  a  re -baptism.  He  scorned 
the  word.  It  was  giving  them  the  great  reality  of 
which  they  had  had  only  a  delusive,  dangerous 
counterfeit.  Such  a  decision  was  a  sad  mistake, 
but  its  general  adoption  all  through  the  North  Af- 
rican Church  was  a  symptom,  albeit  an  unhappy 
one,  of  a  great  revival  of  true  earnestness  and 
Christian  life. 

In  Vol.  X.  of  the  Oxford  Library  of  the  Fathers 
may  be  found  a  valuable  note  on  this  matter,  ap- 
pended to  Tertullian's  Be  Baptismo.  Three  lines 
are  there  stated  to  have  been  followed  by  different 
parties  in  the  Church.  (1)  Some  allowed  every  thing 
that  was  honestly  intended  to  be  Christian  baptism 
to  stand  as  such,  provided  the  right  matter  was 
used,  that  is,  the  actual  application  of  water,  and  the 
right  form, — that  is,  our  Lord's  own  form  of  words, 
In  the  Name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  $071,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost, — though  the  minister  of  the  baptism 
should  be  a  layman,  a  woman,  a  schismatic,  a  heretic, 
or  even    an   unbaptized  person   and   an   unbeliever. 


Three  Vieius  of  What  is  Baptism.  405 

That  was  the  line  taken  by  Stephen  of  Rome.  It 
is  the  ruling  of  the  Roman  Communion  to-day,1  and 
of  the  Holy  Orthodox  Eastern  Church.  (2)  An- 
other line  taken  was  to  disallow  the  baptism  of 
"heretics"  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  that  is, 
of  all  who  in  baptizing  in  the  Triune  Name  put  a 
non-Catholic  interpretation  on  the  words.  Baptism 
is  the  seal  of  a  covenant  between  God  and  those 
who  come  to  Him  to  be  added  to  the  number  of  His 
people.  That  covenant  includes  the  acceptance  of  a 
revealed  faith  on  man's  part.  Where  the  faith  is  not 
held,  the  covenant  cannot  be  made.  This  idea  is 
embodied  in  the  so-called  Apostolical  Canons,  rules 
of  most  uncertain  date  and  origin,  but  representing 
probably  the  mind  of  some  considerable  portion  of 
the  Church  as  early  as  the  latter  half  of  the  third 
century.  Canon  XL VI.  reads,  "  We  ordain  that 
any  bishop  or  presbyter  who  shall  admit  the  baptism 
or  the  sacrifice  of  heretics  shall  be  deposed.  For 
what  concord  hath  Christ  with  Belial  ?  or  ivhat  portion 
hath  a  believer  ivith  an  unbeliever  ?  "  This  seems  to 
have  been  the  general  view  of  the  Churches  of  the 
East  in  early  times.  A  chorus  of  testimonies  de- 
clares it  to  have  been  a  rule  received  from  the 
Apostles.  (3)  The  third  line,  which  was  now  taken 
up  with  a  burst  of  zeal  in  North  Africa  and  in  parts 
of  Asia  Minor,  disallowed  the  baptism  of  schismat- 
ics as  well  as  heretics.  Doubtless  they  got  some 
support   from    confusion   in    the   use    of  the  words 

1  Converts  to  Rome  are  almost  invariably  re-baptized,  at  least 
conditionally :  but  it  is  done  under  the  plea  that  Protestants  are 
so  careless  of  the  "matter  "  and  "form"  of  the  Sacrament  that 
one  can  never  be  sure  that  both  were  duly  employed. 


406  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 


"  heresy  "  and  "heretic,"  which  meant  only  "sect" 
and  "  sectarian  "  in  early  Church  use,  but  they  also 
argued  that  one  who  separated  himself  from  the 
fellowship  of  the  Church  was  plainly  a  heretic  in 
the  strict  sense  as  regards  the  faith  concerning  the 
Church. 

To  the  present  writer  it  seems  fairly  clear  that  the 
second  view  is  really  a  tradition  from  apostolic  times 
and  a  rule  of  safety.  One  can  see  how  the  other 
rules  would  easily  deviate  from  it  on  either  side. 
Where  there  was  a  strongly  metaphysical  tendency, 
as  in  the  East,  and  almost  every  separation  from  the 
main  body  of  the  Church  included  also  some  real 
departure  from  the  faith,  men  would  come  to  quote 
a  law  that  heretical  baptism  was  no  baptism,  as  if  it 
covered  the  case  of  any  persons  who  lived  outside 
of  the  Catholic  communion.  That  seems  to  have 
happened  in  Asia  Minor.  Where  the  tendency  of 
men's  minds  was  rather  practical  than  metaphysical, 
and  so  schismatical  quarrels  gave  much  trouble,  but 
no  heresy  ever  acquired  any  great  popularity,  a  com- 
mon practice  of  acknowledging  the  validity  of  bap- 
tisms performed  outside  the  Catholic  body  might 
lead  men  to  forget  that  their  fathers  had  ever  had  a 
rule  disallowing  any  alien  baptisms  at  all.  That 
seems  to  have  been  the  course  of  things  at  Rome. 
In  Africa,  where  the  question  had  been  once  raised 
in  the  days  of  Agrippinus,  second  bishop  of  Car- 
thage before  Cyprian,  it  would  seem  as  if  a  native 
tendency  to  narrow  intensities  had  had  as  much  as 
anj'thing  to  do  with  the  exclusionist  decision. 

But  even  in  North  Africa  a  general  carelessness 


The  Fifth   Council  of  Carthage.  407 

had  prevailed, — it  was  that,  rather  than  a  generous 
wisdom, — and  now  that  the  question  was  brought  up 
again,  Cyprian  adopted  the  narrow  line  as  a  decision 
of  the  Church  in  better  days,  and  threw  himself  into 
the  defense  of  it  with  all  possible  intensity.  A  coun- 
cil of  thirty-two  bishops,  Cyprian's  fifth  council,  as- 
sembled at  Carthage  in  255,  adopted  a  letter  drafted 
by  Cyprian  as  an  answer  to  a  request  for  advice  re- 
ceived from  eighteen  bishops  in  Numidia.  In  the 
following  spring  there  was  another  council  of  seventy- 
one  bishops,  representing  both  Africa  and  Numidia. 
These  confirmed  the  previous  decision,  and  adopted 
a  form  of  letter  to  be  sent  to  Stephen  at  Rome,  call- 
ing his  attention  to  the  conclusions  reached  among 
them  and  asking  his  cooperation.  With  this  letter 
were  enclosed  copies  of  the  answer  of  the  preceding 
council  to  the  Numidian  enquiry,  and  of  a  letter  of 
Cyprian  to  Quintus,  a  bishop  in  Mauretania.  A 
committee  of  bishops  went  to  Rome  to  confer  with 
Stephen  face  to  face,  and  it  must  have  been  by  their 
hands  that  these  communications  were  conveyed. 

Did  they  know  already  what  Stephen's  opinions 
were?  It  is  altogether  probable.  And  Stephen,  on 
his  side,  had  already  heard  of  the  outrageous  inno- 
vation on  old  Church  policies  which  his  colleague  of 
Carthage  was  urging  so  powerfully.  There  were 
bishops  in  Africa  who  took  the  opposite  side  from 
Cyprian,  and  would  not  come  to  his  councils  to  be 
outvoted,  and  probably  they  had  been  prompt  to  tell 
their  story  to  their  sympathizing  Roman  brother. 
But  the  bishops  from  Carthage  were  quite  unpre- 
pared for  the  reception  which  awaited  them  beyond 


408  The  Post-Ajiostolic  Age. 


the  sea.  The  bishop  of  the  sister  Church  absolutely 
refused  to  receive  them.  He  would  grant  them  no  in- 
terview, public  or  private.  He  directed  the  Roman 
Christians  to  show  them  no  hospitality,  no  courtesy. 
He  sent,  indeed,  a  letter  in  answer  to  that  of  the 
Carthaginian  council,  but  it  was  in  what  men  have 
learned  to  consider  a  truly  Roman  manner,  vouch- 
safing little  argument,  magnifying  the  chair  of  Peter, 
and  actually  denouncing  holy  Cyprian  as  "  a  false 
Christ,  a  false  Apostle,  and  a  deceitful  worker."  He 
proceeded  further  to  send  a  communication  to  the 
bishops  of  Eastern  Asia  Minor,  who  had  for  some 
time  adopted  the  rule  of  indiscriminate  re-baptism, 
declaring  his  intention  not  to  hold  communion 
any  further  with  Churches  in  which  this  rule  was 
kept. 

Such  a  threat  was  a  challenge  to  the  whole  Cath- 
olic Church  to  assert  what  were  held  to  be  true  prin- 
ciples of  order,  and  the  challenge  was  promptly  met. 
Outside  of  Rome,  the  three  chief  bishops  of  that  time 
were  Firmilian  of  the  Cappaclocian  Csesarea,  Dionys- 
ius  of  Alexandria,  and  Cyprian  of  Carthage.  Each 
one  of  them  took  a  decided  stand  against  this  Roman 
aggression.  Firmilian  addressed  to  Cyprian*  a  letter 
still  preserved  to  us  in  the  collection  of  Cj'prian's 
correspondence  (lxxiv.),  in  which  he  echoes  Cyprian's 
arguments  at  great  length,  and  then  turns  upon 
Stephen  in  a  spirit  of  independence,  to  say  the  least. 
"  Of  none  more  than  of  you,"  so  the  bishop  of  Cses- 
area addresses  Stephen, — "  Of  none  more  than  of  you 
does  Divine  Scripture  say,  A  wrathful  man  stirreth  up 
strifes,  and  a  furious  man  heapeth  up  sins.     For  what 


Stephen  Excommunicates  Himself.  409 

strifes  and  dissensions  have  yo\x  stirred  up  through- 
out the  Churches  of  the  whole  world.  Moreover, 
how  great  sin  have  you  heaped  up  for  yourself,  when 
you  cut  yourself  off  from  so  many  flocks.  For  it  is 
yourself  that  you  have  cut  off.  Do  not  deceive 
yourself,  since  he  is  really  the  schismatic  who  has 
made  himself  an  apostate  from  the  communion  of 
ecclesiastical  unity.  For  while  you  think  that  all 
may  be  excommunicated  by  you,  you  have  excom- 
municated yourself  alone  from  all." 

"It  is  yourself  that  you  have  cut  off."  "You 
have  excommunicated  yourself  alone."  St.  Firmil- 
ian's  words  show  that  he  regarded  Stephen's  threat 
as  having  been  carried  into  execution,  and  the  com- 
munion of  Rome  with  Csesarea  and  with  Carthage  as 
already  actually  suspended ;  but  they  show  also 
that  Asia  Minor  cares  no  whit  for  such  a  condemna- 
tion, save  to  mourn  the  fall  from  grace  and  peace  of 
the  furious  "bishop  of  other  men's  affairs"1  who 
pronounced  it. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  broad-minded  and  wise 
and  gentle,  occupies  a  different  position.  He  tries 
to  act  as  a  peacemaker,  and  writes  repeated  letters 
to  Rome,  endeavoring  to  heal  the  strife.  We  hear 
of  five  such  letters  of  Dionysius,  all  addressed  to 
Rome,  as  if  there  lay  the  whole  cause  of  trouble. 
There  was  no  occasion  for  appealing  to  Firmilian  or 
to  Cyprian,  for  they  had  done  no  wrong  and  threat- 
ened none.  One  letter  to  Stephen,  two  to  his  suc- 
cessor Xystus,  one  each  to  two  Roman  presbyters, 

lfrhis  is  the  real  meaning  of  the  phrase  rendered  busybody  in 
other  men's  matters  in  1  St.  Peter  iv.  15. 


410  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

one  a  Dionysius,  who  afterward  became  bishop  in  his 
turn,  show  how  important  the  Alexandrian  bishop 
felt  it  to  be  to  save  the  Roman  Church  from  a  sep- 
aration without  just  ground.  Just  because  Dionys- 
ius was  trying  to  harmonize  men  who  differed  irrec- 
oncilably in  opinion,  he  seems  to  have  kept  back  the 
expression  of  his  own  views.  He  was  certainly  not 
an  extremist.  St.  Basil  in  the  next  century  reports 
of  him  with  surprise  that  he  allowed  the  baptism  of 
Montanists.  Probably  he  did  not  consider  the  Mon- 
tanists  heretical,  wThereas  in  St.  Basil's  time  they 
were  held  to  be  so  unquestionably.  We  may  think 
of  him  as  holding  what  we  have  suggested  to  be 
probably  the  Church's  original  tradition,  accepting 
the  baptism  ministered  by  persons  of  orthodox  faith, 
and  rejecting  that  of  others.  Yet  again  he  tells 
Xystus  how  an  aged  member  of  the  Church  came 
with  tears  to  say  that  he  had  discovered  his  baptism 
to  have  been  utterly  heretical,  and  how  he  (Dionys- 
ius) had  urged  upon  this  old  Christian  that  his  hon- 
est communions  these  many  years  past  could  not 
have  left  him  without  life  and  grace,  and  on  that 
ground  he  would  not  now  baptize  him,  (Uusebius 
vii.  9.)  Dionysius  was  of  a  different  tone  from 
Cyprian.  But  in  his  letters  he  refers  to  the  fact  that 
Cyprian's  opinion  is  no  new  thing,  large  assemblies 
of  bishops  in  former  days  both  in  Africa  and  Asia 
Minor  have  laid  down  the  rule  of  re-baptism.  Then 
without  stating  his  own  opinion  he  says  simply,  "  To 
overturn  their  counsels,  and  throw  them  into  strife 
and  confusion,  I  cannot  endure  "  (Eusebius  vii.  7). 
Dionysius  stands  chiefly  for  the  right  of  every  nat- 


Large  Allowance  of  Wide  Difference.         411 

ural  division  of  the  Church  to  make  its  own  rules, 
right  or  wrong,  and  still  to  enjoy  the  fellowship  of 
all  other  natural  divisions,  no  matter  how  differently 
they  may  regard  the  same  questions,  and  no  matter 
how  concerning  those  questions  may  be. 

And  strange  as  it  may  seem,  this  golden  rule  of 
Dionysius  is  quite  as  much  the  rule  of  Cyprian  also. 
His  answer  to  Stephen's  arrogance  was  given  finally 
and  fully  in  his  seventh  Council  of  Carthage,  in  Sep- 
tember, 256.  Eighty-seven  bishops  were  assembled 
from  Africa,  Numidia,  and  (a  few)  from  distant 
Mauretania.  The  roll  was  called,  and  every  one  of 
them  rose  in  his  place,  and  gave  his  opinion — we  can 
read  the  speeches  preserved  still,  in  an  appendix  to  the 
Cyprianic  letters — in  favor  of  the  policy  which  the 
Roman  bishop  had  resolved  to  meet  with  excommu- 
nication. Yet  little  as  they  heeded  the  attempt  of 
a  foreign  bishop  to  limit  their  freedom,  just  as  little 
would  they  allow  themselves  to  interfere  with  liberty 
in  their  turn.  These  are  the  words  of  Cyprian  him- 
self in  opening  the  proceedings  of  the  council :  "  Our 
present  business  is  to  state  individually  our  views  of 
the  particular  subject  before  us,  judging  no  one,  nor 
removing  from  his  rights  of  communion  any  who 
may  hold  different  views  from  ourselves.  For  there 
is  no  one  of  us  who  constitutes  himself  a  bishop  of 
bishops,  or  pushes  his  colleagues  with  a  tyrannous 
terror  to  the  necessity  of  compliance,  since  every 
bishop,  according  to  the  scope  of  the  liberty  and  of- 
fice which  belongs  to  him,  has  his  decision  in  his 
own  hands,  and  can  no  more  be  judged  by  another 
than  he  can  himself  judge  his  neighbor,  but  we  await 


412  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

one  and  all  the  judgment  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
who  one  and  alone  has  the  power  both  to  prefer  us 
in  the  governing  of  His  Church,  and  to  judge  our 
conduct  therein." 

It  is  hard  for  us  to  realize  this  attitude  of  Cy- 
prian's. We  are  accustomed  for  centuries  past  to  the 
idea  that  if  two  Christians  differ  gravely  about  some- 
thing which  is  to  each  a  matter  of  conscience,  then 
of  course  they  cannot  go  on  together  in  the  same 
Church.  Cyprian  felt  so  strongly  about  this  matter 
of  schismatic  baptism  that  he  called  those  bishops 
who  differed  from  him  "  favorers  of  Anti-Christ,"  and 
"  betrayers  of  the  Church,"  and  yet  he  maintained 
their  right  and  responsibility  to  judge  for  themselves. 
Even  if  it  were  a  case  of  recognizing  as  baptism 
what  Cyprian  believed  intensely  to  be  no  baptism, 
he  was  ready  to  live  in  fullest  fellowship  in  one 
great  Catholic  organism  with  Stephen  of  Rome,  or 
with  any  African  bishop  that  was  on  Stephen's  side. 
Their  mistake,  he  thought,  was  awful,  but  that  kind 
of  mistake  was  for  the  Lord  alone  to  judge.  St. 
Augustine  describes  Cyprian's  theory  of  Church 
order  in  a  golden  phrase  which  is  almost  untranslat- 
able,— Salvo  jure  communionis  diversa  sentire.  In 
double  the  number  of  words,  and  so  with  but  half 
the  strength  and  splendor,  we  may  read  it  as  "  Dif- 
ference of  opinion  to  be  without  prejudice  to  Chris- 
tian Union." 

The  after  history  of  this  great  quarrel  may  be 
soon  told.  Persecution  took  men's  attention  from 
the  subject  for  a  while.  The  deaths  of  Cyprian  and 
Firmilian   left   their  view  with    no    great   man   to 


The  Church  Rejects  Cyprian 's  View.  413 

champion  it.  The  Churches  grew  more  and  more 
away  from  it.  The  great  Council  of  Nicaea  is  found 
ordering  in  two  of  its  Canons  (XIX.  and  VIII.)  the  bap- 
tism of  heretical  Paulianists  and  the  reception  with- 
out a  new  baptism  of  converts  from  the  Cathari  (Puri- 
tans), the  Oriental  name  for  Novatian's  following. 
This  is  the  middle  course  between  the  Roman  rule 
and  the  African.  Within  a  hundred  years  from 
Cyprian's  councils,  another  Council  of  Carthage 
adopts  for  Africa  the  Roman  rule  itself,  and  what 
Cyprian  had  regarded  as  his  chief  work  for  the 
Church  was  all  turned  to  naught.  As  we  leave  the 
subject,  it  is  worth  while  to  think  of  what  our  own 
Jeremy  Taylor  wrote  in  his  "  Liberty  of  Prophesy- 
ing,"— "  St.  Cyprian  did  right  in  a  wrong  cause,  and 
Stephen  did  ill  in  a  good  cause.  As  far  then  as 
piety  and  charity  is  to  be  preferred  before  a  true 
opinion,  so  far  is  Cyprian's  practice  a  better  pre- 
cedent for  us,  and  as  an  example  of  primitive  sanc- 
tity, than  the  zeal  and  indiscretion  of  Stephen.  St. 
Cyprian  had  not  learned  to  forbid  to  any  one  a  lib- 
erty of  prophesying  or  interpretation,  if  he  trans- 
gressed not  the  foundation  of  the  faith  and  the  creed 
of  the  Apostles."  It  may  be  added  that  two  more 
treatises,  written  by  Cyprian  in  this  time  of  conflict, 
On  the  Excellency  of  Patience,  and  On  Envy  and  Jeal- 
ousy, bring  before  us  the  exercises  of  a  saintly  soul, 
trying  to  school  itself  to  live  Christianly  in  the 
midst  of  strife. 

The  strife  was  not  for  long.  So  far  as  it  went  to 
the  extreme  of  schism,  it  had  depended  on  the  tem- 
per of  Stephen,  and  it  fell  with  his  death,  August 


414  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

2,  257.  On  the  last  day  of  the  same  month  Xystus, 
second  Roman  bishop  of  the  name,  was  consecrated 
in  his  place,  and  the  old  brotherly  relations  between 
Rome  and  Carthage  seem  to  have  been  resumed  at 
once  with  simple  naturalness.  War  without  was 
helping  peace  within.  Even  before  Stephen's  death 
the  first  of  Valerian's  persecuting  edicts  had  gone 
forth,  and  on  the  day  before  Xystus  was  made 
bishop  at  Rome,  Cyprian  was  called  before  the  pro- 
consul at  Carthage  to  receive  sentence  of  banish- 
ment. 

The  place  of  his  exile  was  the  little  town  of  Curu- 
bis,  about  fifty  miles  from  Carthage.  He  reached 
the  place  on  September  14, — the  date  is  worth 
bearing  in  mind  for  a  moment — and  that  night  he 
had  a  dream.  He  seemed  to  be  standing  again  be- 
fore the  proconsul,  who  asked  no  questions,  but  sat 
and  wrote  in  silence,  as  if  preparing  a  sentence  to  be 
pronounced.  Behind  the  official  stood  a  young  man, 
a  stranger,  who  signed  to  Cyprian  with  expressive  ges- 
tures that  he  was  to  die  by  beheading.  Cyprian  be- 
gan to  pour  forth  entreaties  for  delay,  he  told  his 
friends,  begging  for  respite  at  least  "  until  to-mor- 
row," that  he  might  arrange  his  affairs.  The  pro- 
consul made  no  answer,  but  he  took  his  tablets  and 
wrote  again,  and  the  youth  behind  his  chair  made 
signs  that  the  request  was  granted.  Then  in  the  re- 
action from  overwhelming  terror  he  awoke. 

The  dream  illustrates  a  side  of  Cyprian's  char- 
acter which  has  not  been  dwelt  upon  here,  but  must 
not  go  unmentioned.  He  lived  in  an  atmosphere  of 
special  providences.    Dreams  and  visions  came  often 


Cyprian's  Belief  in  Heavenly  Signs.  415 

to  him.  He  was  always  expecting  special  interposi- 
tions of  divine  power  to  warn  and  teach.  Conse- 
quently he  sometimes  found  such  where  God  had 
not  put  any.  Once  at  least  he  thought  he  had  a 
heavenly  warning  of  a  great  persecution,  and  the 
persecution  did  not  come.  So  too,  when  he  tells"  us 
of  an  apostate  who  tried  to  return  to  communion 
without  acknowledging  his  fault  and  bearing  the 
punishment  of  it,  and  who  coming  to  the  Altar  to 
receive  the  Lord's  Body,  saw  the  hallowed  Bread 
take  fire,  and  turn  to  a  cinder  in  his  blistered  hand, 
or  when  he  describes  the  case  of  a  baptized  infant 
brought  to  have  its  lips  moistened  with  wine  from 
the  Eucharistic  cup,  who  resisted  with  struggles  and 
sobs,  and  when  forced  to  receive,  with  vomiting,  so 
bringing  the  terrified  nurse  to  confess  that  she  had 
carried  the  child  to  a  heathen  sacrifice,  and  sprinkled 
incense  from  its  fingers,  we  look  impatiently  for  some 
explanation  that  will  account  for  his  being  so  de- 
ceived. And  yet  again  there  are  features  of  Cy- 
prian's career  which  suggest  that  perhaps  he  really 
did  have  signs  from  heaven  beyond  what  common 
men  receive.  There  are  many  curious  parallels  be- 
tween Cyprian  and  a  saintly  man  and  martyr  of 
the  seventeenth  century,  the  much  maligned  Arch- 
bishop Laud,  whose  historians  have  done  him  a  more 
deadly  wrong  than  his  murderers.  In  nothing  is  the 
parallel  closer  than  in  the  way  in  which  both  men 
were  always  seeing  messages  of  God  in  the  condi- 
tions of  their  daily  life.  Most  of  us  could  not  be 
warned  of  anything  by  a  sparrow's  fall,  not  because 
we  think  it  unworthy  of  God  to  send  us  messages, 


416  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

but  because  in  our  heart  of  hearts  we  do  not  believe 
that  God  takes  order  concerning  sparrows.  Men  of 
faith,  like  Cyprian  and  Laud,  find  in  everything  a 
pointing  of  God's  finger.  No  wonder  that  they  are 
quick  to  imagine  sometimes  that  it  is  making  some 
sign  for  them  to  read.  So  from  henceforth  Cyprian 
regarded  himself  as  a  condemned  man  having  a  short 
reprieve  in  which  to  prepare  to  die.  "  To-morrow  " 
became  a  sort  of  by-word  in  his  circle  of  intimate 
friends.  It  stood  for  that  unknown  day  when  he 
should  witness  for  Christ  according  to  his  dream. 

Yet  winter  went  by,  and  spring,  and  summer  was 
come  again,  before  there  came  a  second  rescript  from 
Valerian  urging  the  persecution  to  a  higher  severity. 
Swift  messengers  brought  to  Cyprian  the  news  of 
this  sharper  threatening,  and  of  how  Xystus  of  Rome 
had  just  now,  on  August  6th,  been  seized  in  an 
underground  chapel,  and  brought  before  the  magis- 
trate, and  shortly  taken  back  to  the  place  of  for- 
bidden assembly  and  beheaded  there,  the  better  to 
strike  terror  into  all  his  flock.  At  nearly  the  same 
time  came  a  summons  from  the  new  proconsul  to 
appear  before  him  at  Carthage.  Cyprian  went,  sup- 
posing that  his  hour  was  come,  but  with  no  such 
terrors  as  in  his  dream.  The  proconsul  was  found 
too  ill  to  conduct  his  trial,  and  he  was  remanded  to 
his  own  gardens  on  "  the  hill."  Friends,  both  Chris- 
tian and  heathen,  urged  him  to  flight.  He  felt  no 
call  to  save  his  life,  and  said  so.  Yet  he  might  have 
saved  it.  After  a  few  days  the  proconsul,  now  at 
Utica,  summoned  Cyprian  to  attend  him  there,  and 
lo !  no  Cyprian  was  to  be  found.     He  had  had  infor- 


Cyprian's  Arrest  and  Trial.  417 

mation  of  the  summons,  and  he  would  not  die  at 
Utica.  The  place  for  a  bishop  to  witness  for  Christ 
was  among  his  own  people.  A  few  days  more,  and 
the  proconsul  was  back  in  Carthage.  Then  Cyprian 
was  seen  openly  on  his  estate  again,  only  waiting  for 
the  officers  who  should  be  charged  with  his  arrest. 

They  came,  and  carried  their  prisoner  before  the 
proconsul.  Once  more  he  was  ill,  and  had  to  re- 
mand the  prisoner,  to  be  brought  before  him  the 
next  day.  The  bishop  spent  that  night,  the  night 
of  September  13th,  in  the  house  of  one  of  the  two 
centurions  who  had  arrested  him,  and  was  allowed 
to  receive  his  friends  freely.  They  could  not  but 
note  how  the  " mo  row"  so  long  looked  for  was  de- 
fined for  them.  The  "next  day"  of  the  vision  was 
proved  to  be  the  iext  annual  return  of  September 
14th  itself,  the  da}'  of  the  arrival  at  Curubis  and  of 
the  dream. 

The  proconsul  was  staying  at  a  country  seat  just 
out  of  Carthage,  the  Villa  of  Sextus.  Thither  Cy- 
prian was  led  on  the  "  morrow,"  a  great  crowd  fol- 
lowing. Indeed,  ii  was  said  that  the  whole  Church 
of  Carthage  had  kept  vigil  in  the  streets  round  the 
place  of  their  bishop's  lodging  through  the  night.1 
The  trial  was  of  the  briefest.  There  was  the  usual 
formal  offer  of  an  opportunity  to  sacrifice,  a  word  of 
kindly  appeal  to  this  respected  citizen  to  spare  his 
own  life,  a  firm  refusal  in  shortest  phrase.  Then 
the  proconsul  makes  a  little  speech  about  the  grav- 

1  "With  characteristic  thonghtfulness  Cyprian  had  sent  out  to  ask 
that  special  care  might  be  taken  of  unprotected  girls,  who  might 
be  found  in  this  enthusiastic  throng. 

AA 


418  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

ity  of  this  offence  against  the  imperial  laws.  Then 
the  tablet  is  brought  forward,  and  the  sentence  read, 
— "It  is  our  pleasure  that  Thascius  Cyprianus  be 
executed  with  the  sword."  And  Cyprian  responded, 
"  Thanks  be  to  God." 

In  the  grounds  of  the  Villa  was  a  piece  of  grass  land 
surrounded  by  steep  wooded  slopes.  There  the  con- 
demned man  was  led.  The  crowd  filled  this  natural 
amphitheatre  to  repletion,  and  some  even  climbed 
the  trees  to  get  a  better  view  of  the  final  scene.  If 
there  were  many  heathen  present  who  regarded  the 
prisoner  as  a  foe  of  the  gods,  there  were  many  Chris- 
tians also,  and  some  of  these  strewed  handkerchiefs 
and  napkins  at  his  feet,  hoping  to  have  them  back  made 
precious  with  stains  of  martyr-blood.  The  bishop 
removed  his  cloak,  and  knelt,  and  prayed.  Then  he 
rose,  and  would  have  spoken  to  the  people,  but  no 
words  came.  He  had  expected  confidently  some 
great  inspiration  at  this  time,  some  last  words  of  sur- 
passing -value.  It  is  a  great  proof  of  his  faithful 
waiting  upon  God,  that  he,  so  rich  in  thought,  so 
fluent  in  expression,  could  so  suppress  himself  as  to 
receive  that  strange  providence.  God  had  no  word 
for  him  to  say. 

Meanwhile  the  executioner  had  been  delayed. 
When  he  appeared,  Cyprian  always  generous  with 
monejr,  and  withal  somewhat  of  a  grand  seigneur, 
ordered  twenty-five  gold  pieces  to  be  given  to  him 
(about  X15  or  $75,  but  with  vastly  more  purchasing - 
power),  with  the  customary  request  that  he  perform 
his  office  quickly,  with  no  bungling  strokes.  Then 
the  bishop  covered  his  eyes  with  a  handkerchief  and 


Cyprian's  Death  and  Glorification.  419 

had  it  tied  behind  his  head  by  two  friends,  Julians 
both,  a  presbyter  and  a  sub -deacon.  Then  he  was 
ready  to  die,  yet  for  a  moment  the  stroke  came  not. 
The  executioner,  moved  we  know  not  how,  faltered 
with  a  trembling  hand.  The  centurion  in  command 
of  the  escort  saw  that  he  was  unable  to  perform  his 
office,  and  stepping  forward  himself,  swept  the  head 
from  the  shoulders  with  one  mighty  blow.  So  was 
the  greatest  light  of  the  Western  Church  put  out. 
So  was  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  opened  to  one  who 
took  it  with  a  splendid  and  a  Christlike  force. 

That  night  the  Christians  of  Carthage  kept  vigil 
once  again.  They  filled  the  roads  leading  into  the 
city,  and  with  wax  lights  and  torches,  with  prayer  and 
with  great  triumph,  they  carried  the  body  of  their 
martyr  to  the  burying,  the  first  martyr-bishop,  it 
seems  strange  to  think,  that  the  province  of  Africa 
had  known.  A  hero  both  to  the  few  and  to  the  many, 
Cyprian  combined  in  himself  such  greatnesses  as 
appeal  to  scholars,  and  the  excellences  which  make  a 
man  the  hero  of  the  crowd  as  well.  His  fame  became 
a  popular  possession,  a  popular  treasure.  Even  the 
sailors  traversing  the  Mediterranean  came  soon 
to  know  their  September  gales  as  "  Cyprian's 
breeze."  It  is  a  higher  distinction  that  Cyprian  is  the 
only  Western  saint  with  whom  the  Eastern  Calendars 
are  familiar.  His  crowning  glory  is  that  wherever  the 
service-books  of  the  Roman  Church  are  in  use,  he  is 
commemorated  by  name  in  the  Canon  of  the  Mass. 
The  prayer  "  Communicantes  et  venerantes"  contains 
the  names  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mother,  the  Eleven 
Apostles    and    St.  Paul,  the  three    first  bishops  of 


420  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

Rome,  two  later  Roman  bishops,  and  bnt  seven 
others.  Of  those  seven  the  excommunicated  Cyprian 
is  one,  his  name  standing  side  by  side  with  that  of 
Cornelius,  as  they  had  stood  together  against  the 
madness  of  the  Puritan  Novatian.  The  Roman 
Church  admitted  Cyprian  to  an  honor  never  granted 
to  her  own  Stephen.  Nay,  she  kept  the  "  birth- 
day "  of  Cyprian  in  faithful  remembrance,  and 
could  do  no  better  for  Cornelius  than  in  after  time 
to  join  his  memory  with  Cyprian's  on  the  same  day.1 
Cyprian  was  preeminently  an  imperial  soul,  one 
born  to  command  and  guide  and  sway  men  in  large 
ways.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  five  hundred 
and  fifty  years  after  his  death  two  great,  imperial 
men  were  strangely  united  in  honoring  him.  Haroun 
al  Raschid,  the  glorious  ruler  of  the  Mahometan 
East,  gave  the  saint's  body  to  Charlemagne,  newly 
established  as  Emperor  of  the  Christian  West.  The 
venerable  relics  lay  for  a  while  at  Aries,  and  for  an- 
other period  at  Lyons.  In  876  Charles  the  Bald  built 
the  Church  and  Monastery  of  St.  Cornelius  at  Com- 
piegne,  forty-five  miles  northeast  of  Paris,  to  receive 
the  relics  of  St.  Cornelius,  which  had  been  given  him 
as  a  coronation  gift  the  year  before.    With  these  the 

1 A  feast  of  the  Exaltation  of  the  Holy  Cross,  being  assigned  to 
September  14,  after  a  while  overshadowed  the  commemoration  of 
Cyprian  and  Cornelius  so  much  that  for  their  honor  a  new  day  is 
found  in  modern  Roman  Calendars,  September  16.  At  the  Ref- 
ormation in  England,  whether  by  accident  or  by  design,  St. 
Cyprian's  commemoration  was  assigned  to  September  26,  which 
had  been  the  day  of  a  highly  legendary  Cyprian  of  Antioch,  sup- 
posed to  be  a  converted  magiciau,  who  is  much  cofounded  with 
Cyprian  of  Carthage  in  legend,  and  is  the  hero  of  the  Spanish 
Calderou's  famous  play,  El  Magico  Prodigioso,  which  is  again  the 
source  of  Dean  Milman's  Martyr  of  Antioch. 


Cyprian 's  Lesson  for  To-day.  421 

body  of  Cyprian  was  laid  down  for  its  final  rest.  The 
Roman  and  the  Carthaginian,  venerated  together  in 
the  Liturgy,  commemorated  together  in  the  Calendar, 
laid  side  by  side  in  their  place  of  burial,  emphasize 
the  great  lesson  of  Cyprian's  life.  If  it  had  been 
granted  to  the  martyr  to  write  with  his  own  life- 
blood  a  rubric  on  the  white  page  of  the  Church's  roll 
of  the  faithful,  it  would  surely  have  been  this, — 
"  Difference  of  opinion  shall  be  without  prejudice  to 
Christian  Union."  So  he  would  have  written  in 
that  rosy  hue  which  is  from  of  old  the  Church's 
symbol  of  the  self-sacrifice  of  martyrs,  and  of  the 
flame  of  Divine  Love,  and  of  the  operation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost : 
Salvo  jure  communionis  diveksa  sentire. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE   FORTY   YEARS'    REST,    AND    THE   TENTH   WAVE. 

ROM  the  death  of  Macrian,  263,  to  the 
nineteenth  year  of  Diocletian,  303,  the 
Church  had  rest.  Quietness  is  near  to 
dulness.  There  are  no  great  men  com- 
parable with  Origen  or  with  Cyprian  in 
our  remaining  way.  Yet  there  are  not  lacking 
among  those  who  overlived  the  two  heroes  of  the 
third  century  some  men  notable  for  character  and 
power,  nor  did  such  fail  to  grow  up  after  them.  Our 
remaining  story  down  to  the  renewal  of  persecution 
may  best  be  told  in  the  form  of  brief  notices  of 
certain  eminent  men. 

First  comes  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  early  known 
as  "  the  Great."  He  has  been  mentioned  already  as 
pupil  and  successor  of  Origen.  He  was  also  a  life- 
long friend  of  his  old  teacher,  and  sent  him  a  letter 
of  encouragement  when  the  persecution  of  Decius 
fell  upon  him.  Made  head  of  the  Catechetical  School 
in  232,  and  bishop  in  247,  as  successor  in  each  case 
to  Heraclas,  Dionysius  died  in  peace  at  a  great  age 
in  265,  but  not  without  having  borne  his  share  of 
troubled  times.  Ordered  into  exile  under  Decius, 
and  rescued  from  his  guards  by  a  bold  night-attack 
of  marauders  who  proved  to  be  Christian  friends,  he 
lived  in   hiding   till   that  storm  blew  over.     Exiled 

422 


Dio7iysius   Ojiposes   Chiliasm.  423 

again  under  Valerian,  he  returned  to  Alexandria  to 
meet  the  horrors  of  the  plague.  Always  he  seems 
to  have  been  the  same  strong  character,  gentle, 
calm,  wise,  and  quietly  active.  In  one  respect  he 
was  like  Cyprian.  He  was  an  extraordinarily 
diligent  letter-writer.  Whatever  was  going  on  in 
the  Church,  troubles  about  the  treatment  of  the 
lapsed  and  about  Novatian,  troubles  about  re- 
baptism,  difficulties  concerning  doctrine  in  any  line, 
the  bishop  of  Alexandria  was  always  writing  here 
and  there,  writing  effectively  too,  and  making  him- 
self felt  in  the  whole  world-wide  development  of  the 
Church.  Even  distant  Armenia  was  reached  by 
his  correspondence,  extending  thus  beyond  the 
imperial  bounds.  There  are  just  two  points  of  his 
activity  that  call  for  special  notice. 

(1)  He  opposed  himself  earnestly  to  Chiliasm. 
We  have  seen  (p.  277)  how  in  Irenseus  the  literal  in- 
terpretation of  Rev.  xx.  as  implying  a  bodily  res- 
urrection of  the  Church,  an  interval  of  a  thousand 
years  (a  Millennium},  and  then  a  bodily  resurrection 
of  the  remaining  dead,  was  maintained  as  the  gen- 
eral view  of  Christians.  Grosser  minds  had  made 
the  conception  grosser.  Spiritual  minds  had  then 
reacted  from  the  conception  more  and  more.  In 
that  point  the  Church  had  changed  its  theology  pro- 
foundly, and  Dionysius  is  the  foremost  representative 
of  the  change.  He  has  left  on  record  the  story  of  a 
visit  which  he  made  to  an  Egyptian  district,  Arsinoe, 
where  Chiliasm  had  still  a  stronghold.  Quarrels, 
rising  to  schisms,  had  taken  place,  and  Dionysius 
went  to  be  a  healer.     A  book  against  Allegorists  by 


424  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

a  deceased  bishop,  Nepos,  was  regarded  by  the  old- 
fashioned  as  simply  unanswerable.  Dionysius 
gathered  the  clergy  and  teachers,  and  all  who  cared 
to  come,  and  for  three  days  exam  ned  the  arguments 
with  them  from  morning  to  nigh:.  The  memory  of 
Nepos  was  treated  with  reverent  respect.  "  And  we 
abstained  from  defending  in  every  manner  and  con- 
tentiously  the  opinions  which  we  had  once  held, 
unless  they  appeared  to  be  correct.  Nor  did  we 
evade  objections,  but  we  endeavored  as  far  as  possi- 
ble to  confirm  the  things  which  lay  before  us,  and  if 
the  reason  given  satisfied  us,  we  were  not  ashamed 
to  change  our  opinions,  and  agree  with  others ;  but 
on  the  contrary,  conscientiously  and  sincerely,  and 
with  hearts  laid  open  before  God,  we  accepted  what- 
ever was  established  by  the  proofs  and  teachings  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures."  The  result  of  this  conference 
was  that  the  chief  leader  of  the  Chiliasts  was  brought 
entirely  over  to  the  bishop's  side,  and  the  people 
generally  followed  after.  What  matters  it  which 
opinion  was  the  right  opinion,  and  whether  Origen's 
allegorism  had  illuminated  or  obscured  the  Scripture? 
Controversy  conducted  in  such  a  temper  is  in  any 
case  a  triumph  of  Christ. 

(2)  Dionysius  was  a  leading  opponent  of  what 
was  known  as  Sabellianism  (p.  2<>4),  and  like  other 
opponents  of  that  heresy  he  dwelt  so  much  upon  the 
distinctions  between  Father  and  Son,  and  upon  the 
"  subordination "  of  the  Son,  as  to  be  charged  in 
Arian  days  with  having  had  Arian  meanings.  The 
great  Athanasius,  singularly  subtle  and  also  singularly 
broad-minded,  is  a  sufficient  witness  to  us  that  the 


Misunderstandings  as  to  the  use  of  Words.    425 

accusation  was  unjust.  But  it  is  noteworthy  that 
Dionysius,  bishop  of  Rome,  259-269,  was  so  disturbed 
by  some  of  his  namesake's  utterances  that  he  wrote 
to  him  to  ask  for  explanations.  Explanations  were 
given  by  the  kindly  old  scholar  in  such  wise  as  to  be 
perfectly  satisfactory.  It  seems  to  have  been  the 
first  appearance  of  a  difficulty  of  understanding  be- 
tween Greeks  and  Latin3,  which  gave  much  trouble 
in  after  times.  A  Greek  word  Hypostasis  and  a 
Latin  word  Substantia  had  the  same  natural  mean- 
ing, "  that  which  underlies,"  or  more  literally,  "  that 
which  stands  under "  something  else.  The  Latin 
theologians  took  their  word  Substantia  to  express  the 
essential  Being  of  God,  that  which  underlies  every 
Divine  manifestation.  The  Greek  theologians  took 
their  word  Hypostasis  to  express  the  idea  of  the  Per- 
son who  stands  behind  all  action  and  is  responsible 
for  it.  The  Latins  rightly  insisted  that  there  could 
be  but  one  Substantia  in  the  Godhead,  and  the 
Greeks  as  rightly  insisted  that  there  must  be  three 
Hypostases  in  the  Godhead.  At  first  look  it  seemed 
as  if  Latin  word  and  Greek  word  had,  or  at  any  rate 
ought  to  have,  the  same  meaning,  and  as  if  Latins  and 
Greeks  were  contradicting  one  another.1  It  took 
patience  and  good- will  to  disentangle  such  a  snarl, 
and  because  men  are  apt  to  have  clashing  theories  as 
to  what  words  ought  to  mean  in  other  men's  mouths, 
the  difficulty  had  to  come  up  again  in  the  next  age. 
But  in  the  third  century,  at  any  rate,  Dionysius  had 
here    another   triumph   of   that   patience    and  good 

1The   difficulty   was   greater  because   some   Greeks   had   used 
Hypostasis  for  "Substance,"  and  Ousia  for  "  Person." 


426  The  Post -Apostolic  Age. 

temper  which  are  his  best  title  to  the  name  of 
"  Great." 

Dionysius  administered  well  one  of  the  oldest  and 
strongest  Churches  in  Christendom.  Gregory  of 
Neo-Csesarea  in  Pontus  illustrates  the  life  of  the  mis- 
sionary-bishop, who  has  to  build  up  everything  from 
new  foundations.  Theodorus — such  was  his  original 
name — and  his  brother  Athenodorus  were  sons  of 
a  heathen  family  in  a  heathen  land.  Their  Pontus 
was  a  strip  of  country  lying  along  the  south  shore  of 
the  Black  Sea  at  its  eastern  end,  a  region  remote 
from  the  great  centres  of  Roman  civilization,  and 
only  in  Nero's  time  incorporated  into  the  Empire. 
The  two  youths  were  sent  to  Palestine  to  study  law, 
and  we  have  heard  (p.  340)  Theodore's  account  of 
their  feeling  when  a  good  providence  made  them 
hearers  of  Origen.  All  thought  of  law-study  was 
laid  aside.  Both  gave  themselves  wholly  to  phi- 
losophy and  theology,  and  to  whatever  might  advance 
them  in  the  school  of  Christ.  Five  years  of  study 
under  Origen  led  up  to  the  young  men's  baptism, 
when  Theodorus  took  the  new  name  of  Gregorius 
(Vigilant),  and  then  after  the  new-made  Gregory 
had  delivered  a  panegyric  oration,  still  preserved  to 
us,  on  his  teacher's  excellent  methods  and  marvellous 
powers,  the  brothers  returned  to  Pontus,  mourning 
as  Adam  must  have  mourned  for  Eden.  For  Origen, 
says  the  Oration,  "  was  truly  a  Paradise  to  us,  after 
the  similitude  of  the  Paradise  of  God." 

These  Christians  of  splendid  endowment,  being 
now  called  to  live  in  a  heathen  city,  must  be  mis- 
sionaries.     That  was  obvious.      But  there  was  no 


Stories  of  Gregory  Thaumaturgus.  427 

Church  without  a  bishop  in  third  century  thought. 
Gregory  must  be  a  bishop,  therefore,  too.  At  first 
he  absolutely  refused,  but  the  bishop  of  the  nearest 
Christian  centre,  Amasea,  came  to  him  after  a  while 
with  the  startling  assurance  that  he  (Phsedimus)  had 
both  elected  him  to  be  bishop  and  also  consecrated 
him  with  prayer,  while  separated  from  him  by  a 
three  days'  journey.  Gregory  submitted  then  to  re- 
ceive the  ordinary  forms  of  consecration,  and  entered 
(probably  about  240)  on  his  work.  He  found  but 
seventeen  Christians  in  Neo-Csesarea.  When  he 
died,  between  264  and  269,  he  mourned  that  there 
were  seventeen  heathens  left  still  unconverted  in  his 
care.  Various  cities  of  Pontus  were  now  supplied 
with  Christian  bishops,  his  brother  Athenodore  be- 
ing one.     Gregory  had  had  a  marvellous  success. 

So  marvellous  was  it  that  it  won  for  him  the 
name  of  Thaumaturgus  (Wonder-worker),  and  after 
the  name,  if  one  may  guess  at  the  course  of  things, 
grew  up  such  a  series  of  tales  of  miracle  as  had  never 
followed  the  work  of  a  missionary  apostle  before. 
Not  only  did  he  heal  the  sick  and  cast  out  devils. 
He  turned  the  current  of  a  river  by  planting  his  staff 
in  its  bed,  and  lo !  the  staff  became  a  tree,  which  re- 
mained a  monument  of  the  marvel.  He  found  two 
brothers  quarrelling  bitterly  over  the  possession  of  a 
lake,  which  formed  part  of  their  patrimony.  The 
saint  prayed  for  the  removal  of  their  temptation, 
and  the  lake  became  dry  land.  He  slept,  one  night, 
in  a  heathen  temple,  the  seat  of  a  noted  oracle. 
From  that  night  the  oracle  was  dumb,  till  Gregory, 
hearing     bitter      complaints     from     the     temple's 


428  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

guardians,  gave  them  a  written  paper.  The  words 
were, — "  Gregory  to  Satan :  Enter."  The  evil 
spirit  then  resumed  his  old  power.  In  the  sequel  the 
priest  of  the  temple  became  a  devoted  Christian,  and 
was  Gregory's  successor  as  bishop.  Miracles  of  de- 
struction were  not  wanting.  Thus  a  beggar  pre- 
tended to  be  dead,  while  his  companion  asked  for 
alms  to  bury  him.  Gregory  threw  his  cloak  over  the 
pretended  corpse,  and  passed  on.  Beneath  the  cloak 
was  found  a  corpse  in  very  truth. 

We  may  be  thankful  that  none  of  these  stories  are 
given  by  Eusebius  fifty  years  after  Gregory's  death. 
He  had  not  heard  them,  or  he  did  not  believe  them. 
But  fifty  years  later  still,  so  great  a  man  as  Gregory 
of  Nyssa  tells  them  for  facts,  as  he  and  his  greater 
brother  Basil  had  heard  them  from  their  grand- 
mother, who  lived  hard  by  Neo-Csesarea.  Certain 
"  Canons  "  left  by  Gregory  in  a  letter  to  another 
bishop  in  Pontus  show  too  plainly  that  his  wholesale 
conversion  of  that  people  had  been  but  a  half- con- 
version after  all.  It  was  the  fate  of  the  profound 
philosopher  to  draw  after  him  a  superstitious  people 
who  threw  themselves  into  the  following  of  the  man 
much  faster  than  they  could  possibly  assimilate  the 
teaching.  We  must  regret  the  imperfect  Chris- 
tianity, the  crass  superstition.  We  have  no  right  to 
leave  without  thankful  recognition,  the  fact  that  the 
note  which  it  sounds  is  a  new  note  in  our  history. 
The  story  of  Narcissus  of  Jerusalem  gave  us  just  a 
foretaste  of  the  temper  that  delights  in  false  marvels. 
Yet  that  was  not  prevailingly  the  temper  of  the 
Post-Apostolic  Age. 


St.  Firmilian  of  Ceesarea.  429 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  among  the  writings 
which  may  be  ascribed  with  some  confidence  to 
Gregory  is  a  form  of  Creed,  which  is  said  to  be  the 
best  statement  of  the  Nicene  doctrine  produced 
in  the  Ante-Nicene  Age.  Considering  Gregory's 
singular  devotion  to  Origen,  who  again  addresses 
Gregory  in  an  extant  letter  as  "  My  most  excellent 
lord  and  venerable  son,"  this  Creed  preserved  in  the 
archives  of  Neo-Csesarea  may  be  taken  as  a  testi- 
mony to  Origen's  penetrating  wisdom  of  orthodox 
thought. 

The  third  place  in  our  gallery  of  portraits  must  be 
given  to  another  contemporary  of  Cyprian,  reserved 
to  do  his  greatest  work  after  Cyprian  was  gone,  the 
great  Cappadocian,  Firmilian.  Like  Cornelius  of 
Rome  and  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  he  was  of  noble 
birth.  In  the  "Acts"  of  a  martyr,  Capitolina,  who 
suffered  in  the  persecution  under  Valerian,  it  is  told 
how  the  magistrate  implored  her  to  save  her  honored 
family  name  from  the  disgrace  of  a  public  execution. 
"  The  greatest  distinction  of  our  family,"  she  an- 
swered, "is  the  fact  that  Firmilian  belongs  to  it.  . 
.  .  Him  will  I  follow,  after  his  example  I  fear- 
lessly confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  King  of  kings." 
He  was  "  distinguished  "  as  a  bishop  in  the  view  of 
Eusebius  as  early  as  the  year  231.  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria  names  him  in  a  list  of  bishops  which  he 
limits  expressly  to  "  the  more  noteworthy."  After  the 
death  of  Dionysius,  Eusebius  puts  Firmilian  first  in 
his  list  of  eminent  men.  We  have  already  seen  him 
taking  a  leading  part  in  inviting  bishops  to  meet  at 
Antioch  to  keep  Fabius  from  recognizing  Novatian. 


430  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

We  know  that  he  represented  the  bishops  of  Asia 
Minor  in  correspondence  with  Cyprian.  He  now 
stands  forward  as  champion  of  the  Church's  dis- 
cipline against  Paul  of  Samosata,  bishop  of  the  great 
city  of  Antioch. 

This  Paul  is  a  strange  and  puzzling  character.  He 
seems  to  have  been  a  man  without  religion  and  with- 
out conscience,  shrewd,  clever,  ambitious,  who  dis- 
covered that  for  him  the  easiest  way  from  poverty  to 
power  was  through  the  membership  and  the  ministry 
of  the  Christian  Church.  If  that  was  his  idea,  he 
succeeded  in  realizing  it.  He  made  himself  a  prime 
favorite  with  Zenobia,  the  Jewess  Queen  of  Pal- 
myra, and  through  her  patronage  was  so  brought 
forward  that  he  got  himself  made  bishop  of  Antioch, 
somewhere  between  257  and  260,  while  he  received 
directly  from  Zenobia  herself  an  appointment  as  civil 
governor  of  that  city  in  her  name,  with  a  salary  of 
some  £1,600,  or  $8,000,  in  the  money  of  that  day. 
He  is  charged  with  overweening  pride  and  conceit, 
with  setting  up  the  state  of  an  Eastern  Satrap,  with 
demanding  applause  like  that  of  a  theatre  to  be 
given  to  his  preaching,  with  oppression,  insolence, 
injustice,  extortion,  with  utter  carelessness  as  to  ap- 
pearances that  suggested  an  immoral  life,  and  finally, 
with  using  his  double  power  as  bishop  of  the  Chris- 
tians and  civil  governor  of  the  whole  population,  to 
make  it  a  matter  of  danger  and  of  abject  fear  for 
any  ordinary  man  to  bring  any  accusation  against 
him.  Yet  stories  went  out  from  Antioch,  and  Chris- 
tian bishops  like  Firmilian  were  not  to  be  prevented 
from  doing  their  duty. 


Heresy  and  Deposition  of  Paul.  431 

Another  sort  of  charge  was  made  also.  Paul  had 
embraced  the  heresy  of  Artemon, — it  seems  indis- 
tinguishable from  the  Monarchianism  of  Theodotus 
(p.  252), — and  was  trying  to  revise  ChristianhVv  in 
such  wise  as  to  make  it  more  acceptable  to  his 
Jewish  patroness  and  her  heathen  counsellors.  Here 
was  a  case  to  which  Cyprian  himself  would  not  have 
applied  his  rule,  diversa  sentire.  This  was  not  an 
allowable  difference  of  human  opinion,  but  a  betrayal 
of  the  trust  of  the  Divine  Faith.  A  great  meeting 
of  bishops  was  held  at  Antioch,  Firmilian  presid- 
ing, Gregory  Thaumaturgus  and  his  brother  attend- 
ing from  distant  Pontus,  Helenus  from  Tarsus, 
Maximus  from  Bostra  in  Arabia,  Hymeneeus  from 
Jerusalem,  mother  of  Churches,  and  Theotecnus  from 
Palestinian  Ceesarea.  These,  with  many  more,  con- 
sidered the  charge  of  heresy  in  a  charitable  spirit, 
ready  to  believe  that  they  had  been  misinformed. 
Paul  had  subtlety,  and  he  fooled  them.  He  offered 
plausible  explanations.  The  assembly  accepted  them 
gladly  and  dispersed.  In  a  year  or  two  Firmilian 
thought  it  needful  to  convene  another.  This  time 
Malchion,  an  able  presbyter  of  Antioch.  had  courage 
and  skill  enough  to  bring  out  the  heretic  in  his  true 
colors.  Driven  to  another  shift,  Paul  promised  re- 
cantation and  amendment.  Again  the  bishops  used 
charity  and  gave  trust.  It  was  soon  found  to  be  in 
vain.  A  third  council  was  called,  perhaps  in  268, 
not  later;  Firmilian  died  in  Tarsus  on  the  way  to  it. 
Helenus  of  Tarsus  presided  in  his  place.  The  dis- 
honest heretic  was  deposed  and  excommunicated, 
prince  though  he  was,  and  the   council  elected  and 


432  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

consecrated  in  his  place  Doranas,  a  grandson,  it  is 
observed,  of  Paul's  predecessor,  Demetrian.  A  mar- 
ried clergy  was  not  yet  against  the  mind  of  the 
Church. 

Three  things  demand  notice  here.  (1)  The  elec- 
tion was  irregular,  because  Paul's  cruel  power  over 
Antioch  was  such  that  free  election  by  the  people 
was  impossible.  The  deposed  bishop  used  his  civil 
power  to  keep  the  bishop's  church  and  the  bishop's 
house  in  his  possession  till  Zenobia's  power  fell  be- 
fore the  emperor  Aurelian.  Then  Christians  came 
before  him,  asking  justice.  Let  their  own  property 
be  given  to  their  own  recognized  chief  pastor,  and 
not  to  one  who  was  an  outcast  from  their  society. 
Aurelian  recognized  the  justice  of  such  a  claim,  but 
how  was  he  to  judge  of  a  question  of  administration 
within  the  Christian  society?  "Let  the  property 
go  to  him  whom  the  Christian  bishops  of  Rome  and 
Italy  recognize  as  their  colleague  in  this  place,"  was 
the  decision.  Most  natural  and  simple  and  proper, 
but  a  little  stone  added  to  what  came  in  after  years 
to  be  a  monumental  heap. 

(2)  The  bishops  sent  out  a  letter  addressed  to 
Dionysius  of  Rome, — he  died  in  December,  268, — 
to  Maximus  of  Alexandria,  and  to  all  other  Christian 
bishops.  In  it  they  set  forth  largely  the  evil  things 
which  they  had  learned  to  believe  concerning  Paul, 
in  spite  of  their  long  patience  and  the  difficulty  of 
getting  proofs.  "  While  one  might  call  the  man  to 
account  for  this  conduct,"  they  say,  "if  he  held  the 
Catholic  doctrine,  and  was  numbered  with  us,  since 
he  has  scorned  the  mystery,     ...     we  think  it 


The  Word  Homo-ousios.  433 

unnecessary  to  demand  of  him  an  explanation  of 
these  things."  In  other  words,  having  plain  proof 
of  heresy,  so  that  we  must  depose  and  excommuni- 
cate him  anyhow,  we  do  not  hold  it  needful  to  go  on 
and  try  him  on  a  charge  of  immorality  too,  which 
in  the  circumstances  of  Antioch  would  be  very 
hard  to  prove  by  witnesses  in  detail !  It  is  not  quite 
fair  to  say  that  "  he  might  have  been  even  worse  than 
he  was  in  his  morals,  and  yet  no  decisive  steps  have 
been  taken  against  him,  had  he  not  deviated  from 
the  orthodox  faith."  "  One  might  call  the  man  to 
account  "  does  not  ordinarily  imply  "  One  would  not 
do  it." 

(3)  This  council  of  eminent  bishops  at  Antioch 
condemned  as  heretical  the  use  of  a  certain  word, 
and  that  word  was  Homo-ousios,,  afterward  the  very 
watchword  of  orthodoxy,  for  which  one  like  Atha- 
nasius  would  be  ready  to  give  his  life.  It  is  a  serious 
lesson  as  to  the  distinction  between  forms  and 
meanings.  Paul  had  insisted  on  finding  in  this 
word  a  meaning  which  all  parties  agreed  was  certainly 
heretical.  It  being  assumed  that  it  carried  that 
meaning,  the  form  was  rightly  condemned,  because 
it  was  then  a  poisonous  form.  Within  sixty  years 
later  the  same  word  was  found  to  be  Ti  natural 
vehicle,  and  the  best  possible  one,  for  conveying  a 
truth  which  was  before  all  things  precious.  The 
phial  which  had  held  poison  was  then  cleansed,  and 
filled  with  a  medicine  needed  for  the  healing  of  the 
nations.  Then  the  Church,  which  had  condemned 
it  before,  gave  it  to  all  men,  and  said,  "  Drink,  and 
live."     The    power    to    distinguish    between    mere 

BB 


434  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

words  and  what  men  mean  by  them,  both  to  acquit 
and  sometimes  to  condemn,  is  a  power  always  needed 
by  the  Church  of  God. 

From  the  heretical  prince-bishop  and  the  faithful 
men  who  contended  against  him,  we  return  to  the 
Church's  missionary  causes.  Somewhere  about  the 
year  257,  Chosroes,  ruler  of  Armenia,  was  assassi- 
nated by  Anag,  a  prince  of  a  rival  house.  The 
dying  king  ordered  the  execution  of  his  murderer 
and  all  his  family.  Shortly  afterward  the  Persians 
overran  the  Armenian  kingdom,  and  annexed  it. 
Out  of  all  this  slaughter  and  overthrow  escaped  two 
who  were  to  make  a  great  mark  on  Armenian  his- 
tory, Tiridates,  son  of  Chosroes,  who  made  his  way 
to  Rome,  and  an  infant  son  of  Anag,  who  was  car- 
ried by  his  nurse  to  Cappadocia,  and  there  baptized 
under  the  name  of  Gregory.  Tiridates,  in  after 
years,  regained  his  father's  kingdom.  Gregory  be- 
came a  favored  servant  of  his  court.  Then  came 
Gregory's  refusal  to  take  part  in  heathen  rites,  the 
discovery  that  he  was  a  son  of  Chosroes'  assassin, 
then  persecution,  torture,  and  years  of  imprisonment. 
Then  the  king  fell  sick,  so  the  story  runs,  and  was 
delivered  through  Gregory's  prayers,  with  the  result 
of  his  conversion,  and  the  conversion  of  the  whole 
nation.  Certainly  there  had  been  Christianity  in 
Armenia  before.  We  have  found  an  Armenian 
bishop  among  the  correspondents  of  Dioirysius  of 
Alexandria.  But  the  cause  had  languished,  and 
Gregory  the  Illuminator,  as  the  Armenian  Church 
calls  him,  was  felt  to  be  practically  the  Apostle  of 
his   nation.     He  was   consecrated  as  bishop  of   the 


Vitality  of  the  Armenian  Church.  435 

royal  city,  Valarshabad,  by  Leontius  of  Cassarea, 
about  302,  and  changed  the  name  of  his  see  to 
Etchmiadzin  (Descent  of  the  Only-Begotten),  in 
honor  of  a  vision  of  our  Lord  which  had  been  vouch- 
safed  him  there.  Armenia  is  claimed  as  the  first 
country  which  received  Christianity  so  as  to  make 
it  a  national  religion.  The  nation  has  long  since 
lost  its  place  among  the  nations,  and  the  Armenians 
are  largely  a  dispersion,  like  the  Jews.  But  the 
Church  of  Gregory's  planting  still  remains,  the  most 
sorely  tried  Church  that  lives  in  Christendom  to-day. 
There  may  possibly  be  somewhere  a  stronger  plant 
of  God's  planting.  There  is  none,  assuredly,  that 
has  borne  such  violence  without  perishing  as  the 
Church  of  the  Armenians.  To  this  day,  when  their 
Catholicos — the  title  of  their  chief  bishop — is  con- 
secrated, the  dead  hand  of  Gregory  the  Illuminator 
is  laid  upon  his  head.  It  is  an  allegory.  Amid 
much  deadness  and  corruption  Armenian  Christian- 
ity has  never  failed  to  be  a  source  of  power. 

But  even  while  Gregory  the  Armenian  was  pre- 
paring to  carry  Christ's  conquests  farther  into  the 
Orient,  the  Orient  was  launching  its  last  great  coun- 
ter-assault. Maniy  a  Persian,  215-277,  was  brought 
up  among  the  Mandseans,  the  descendants  of  the  early 
Nazarenes,  and  so  became  (p.  181)  familiar  early  with 
their  miserable  remnants  of  Christianity,  with  Per- 
sian Magism  or  Zoroastrianism,  and  with  Indian 
Buddhism.  Out  of  all  these  he  concocted  a  new  re- 
ligion called  from  his  own  name  Manichaeism,  which 
may  be  described  briefly  as  the  last  effort  of  Gnos- 
ticism to  speak  so  as  to  get  the  world's  ear.  There  was 


436  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

the  old  notion  that  matter  was  evil,  and  creation  a 
sin,  with  an  elaborate  jargon  about  the  opposition  of 
light  and  darkness,  an  immensity  of  claim  as  to  what 
the  system  could  do  to  uplift  the  human  race,  a  high 
degree  of  organization  curiously  anticipating  in  some 
ways  the  later  papacy  of  the  Christian  Church,  and 
most  important  of  all  perhaps  for  keeping  a  great 
crowd  of  adherents,  a  division  of  its  following  into 
two  classes,  "  the  elect "  and  "  the  auditors,"  of 
whom  the  latter  were  really  admitted  to  know  but 
little  of  their  own  mystery,  and  so  kept  constantly 
looking  for  great  things  to  be  known  and  done  by 
and  by.  Any  attempt  to  describe  the  Manicheean 
system  would  be  out  of  place  here,  but  it  may  be  re- 
marked that  it  was  for  long  a  serious  foe  to  Chris- 
tianity- So  great  a  man  as  St.  Augustine  was  a 
Manichsean  "hearer"  for  nine  years,  before  he  dis- 
covered that  he  was  being  fooled  with  fine,  but  empty 
words.  Severe  persecution  from  both  heathen  and 
Christian  powers  caused  the  disappearance  of  the 
organization  in  the  West  in  the  seventh  century ; 
but  in  the  eleventh  a  fresh  wave  of  Manichrean  in- 
fluence was  poured  over  southern  Europe  from  Ar- 
menian settlements  in  Bulgaria,  and  the  sects  known 
as  Bogomiles,  Paulicians,  Albigenses,  Catharists,  are 
not  to  be  regarded  (as  they  are  sometimes)  as  "  Re- 
formers before  the  Reformation,"  but  as  last  expir- 
ing influences  from  Mani,  "  the  Maniac,"  as  Euse- 
bius  calls  him,  of  the  third  century. 

We  come  back  once  more  to  Egypt,  fertile  mother 
of  new  ideas  in  the  early  days.  Is  there  any  natural 
connection  of  thought  between  Mani,  the  inventor  of 


The  Divine  Call  to  the  Ascetic  Life.  437 

ManichaBism,  and  Antony,  the  pioneer  of  Monasti- 
cisra?  Perhaps  there  really  maybe.  The  ascetic 
temper,  the  temper  that  despises  material  things,  the 
spirit  that  thinks  that  to  have  flesh  is  carnal,  and  to 
live  in  the  world  is  worldly,  that  temper,  that  spirit, 
are  always  working  among  men.  They  must  have 
some  vent,  whether  it  be  in  a  sect,  a  monastery,  or  a 
total  abstinence  society.  Certainly  monasticism  was 
a  better  vent  than  Manichseism.  Nay,  if  John  Bap- 
tist could  be  divinely  called  to  prepare  by  years  of 
seclusion  in  the  wilderness  for  a  few  months  of  what 
men  commonly  call  usefulness,  it  may  be  too  pre- 
sumptuous for  us  of  to-day  to  assume  that  every  one 
of  the  multitude  of  devout  persons  who  in  various 
ages  have  thought  themselves  called  to  live  an  ascetic 
and  a  secluded  life,  have  been  utterly  and  fatuously 
mistaken.  It  is  strange  how  ready  some  students 
are  who  have  contended  earnestly  for  the  independ- 
ence of  the  individual  soul  in  its  waiting  upon  God, 
and  have  urged  that  every  soul  ought  to  cultivate 
the  habit  of  listening  for  an  inner  voice,  to  set  aside 
with  one  impatient  sweep  of  the  arm  the  thousands 
of  testimonies  of  devout  souls  that  they  did  wait 
earnestly  upon  God,  and  He  did  call  them  manifestly 
this  way  To  say  that  no  Christian  soul  ever  had  a 
call  from  God  to  live  the  life  of  a  monk  or  a  nun,  is, 
the  present  writer  ventures  to  think,  a  shocking  in- 
fidelity as  to  the  spiritual  experiences  of  God's  chil- 
dren. It  is  unphilosophical  for  one  who  believes  in 
spiritual  experience,  in  God  speaking  to  the  heart, 
at  all,  to  cast  away  as  rubbish  and  merest  self-decep- 
tion so  much  of  the  spiritual  experience  of  the  ages. 


438  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

A  truer  way  to  read  history  would  seem  to  be, — 
"  God  makes  some  men  and  women  so  that  they  can 
live  their  best  in  an  ascetic  life  and  a  separated  life. 
He  has  a  use  for  them  to  serve  in  the  world  by  com- 
ing out  of  the  world.  We  may  not  be  able  to  see 
what  it  is,  any  more  than  we  know  why  a  good  man 
is  called  away  by  death  sometimes,  when  our  wis- 
dom would  have  kept  him  here.  But  God  calls 
them,  these  sons  and  daughters,  and  they  hear  His 
voice,  and  follow  it.  What  are  we  that  we  should 
gainsay  them, — and  Him?" 

Antonius,  known  to  us  as  St.  Antony,  or  Anthony, 
was  not  the  first  man  in  Egypt  to  hear  such  a  call, 
but  he  was  the  first  who  so  received  it  as  to  make  it 
echo  far  and  wide.  He  has  been  called  "  the  father 
of  asceticism."  Justly,  because  where  before  the 
Church  had  seen  an  occasional  "  solitary,"  Antony's 
example  drew  out  a  multitude,  and  from  henceforth 
the  monastic  life  became  one  of  the  familiar  forms  of 
Christian  living,  as  well  known,  as  much  recognized, 
as  any  other.  We  know  Antony's  story  from  a  sin- 
gularly trustworthy  source,  the  devout,  learned,  philo- 
sophical, clear-headed,  sober-judging  Athanasius. 
No  better  man  in  Christendom  to  tell  a  story  truly, 
without  exaggeration  or  delusion.  And  he  had 
known  the  old  hermit  well,  and  been,  it  would  seem, 
from  a  phrase  in  the  preface  to  his  "  Life  of  Antony," 
at  one  time  a  personal  attendant  upon  him.  This, 
then,  is  a  brief  outline  of  his  story.  Antony  was 
born  of  a  good  family  in  easy  circumstances  at  Coma 
in  Upper  Egypt.  His  parents  died  when  he  was  be- 
tween eighteen  and  twenty,  leaving  him  with   the 


The  Career  of  St.  Anthony.  439 

care  of  a  sister  somewhat  younger.  Brought  up  a 
Christian,  he  had  lived  a  quiet  and  dutiful  life,  but 
had  had  no  interest  in  study,  no  great  zeal,  appar- 
ently, for  anything.  He  had  in  him  the  capacity  for 
a  magnificent  intensity,  but  it  had  never  been 
reached  and  roused.  One  day  in  Church  he  heard 
the  Gospel  read,  and  it  was  the  story  of  the  young 
man  who  had  great  possessions.  Antony  went  out 
with  "  Go,  sell  all  that  thou  hast,"  ringing  in  his 
ears.  He  parted  with  his  property  and  gave  away 
the  proceeds,  only  reserving  a  portion  for  his  sister. 
Another  Gospel  sounded  the  warning  "Take  no 
thought  for  the  morrow,"  and  Antony  gave  up  even 
that  provision, — it  seems  a  pity  that  "  if  any  provide 
not  for  his  own  "  was  not  read  in  the  Epistle  on  the 
same  day, — put  his  sister  in  a  "  house  of  virgins  " 
near  by,  and  went  out  to  live  the  life  of  a  hermit. 
He  removed  himself  farther  and  farther  from  the 
haunts  of  men.  He  became  so  rigid  with  himself 
that  his  only  food  was  bread  and  water,  he  did  not 
eat  till  sun-down,  often  he  fasted  absolutely  for  two 
days  and  nights  together.  It  may  be  said  that  men 
gave  him  fame.  It  does  seem  certain  that  God  gave 
him  power.  Miracles  of  healing  are  ascribed  to  him, 
miracles  of  power  against  evil  spirits,  marvels  of  su- 
pernatural knowledge,  and  it  is  noteworthy  that 
these  wonders  are  much  more  like  our  Lord's  mir- 
acles than  like  those  ascribed  by  half-heathen  Pon- 
tus  to  Gregory  the  Thaumaturge.  But  more  than 
this,  the  man  himself  was  a  power.  Bright  and 
cheerful  in  the  midst  of  his  perpetual  rigors,  meek 
and  modest  while  beset  with  flattering  admirations, 


440  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

he  held  that  kind  of  sway  over  many,  hearts  which 
none  but  the  ascetic  gains.  It  is  only  an  Elijah,  re- 
nouncing all  earthly  relationships,  that  can  at  some 
supreme  crises  turn  the  hearts  of  the  children  to  the 
fathers.  It  is  only  a  John  the  Baptist,  living  out- 
side the  world,  that  can  get  the  world's  attention  at 
certain  times,  so  as  to  prepare  it  for  the  special  Vis- 
itation of  Jesus  Christ.  Antony  passed  his  century- 
mark,  and  died  in  355,  when  the  Christian  world 
was  divided  between  Catholic  and  Arian.  Whether 
it  was  reasonable  or  no,  the  life  of  Antony  held 
masses  of  men  to  the  Catholic  side,  whom  the  argu- 
ment of  Athanasius  could  never  reach.  Man  is  a 
rational  being,  but  most  men  are  not  reasoners. 
Logic  wearies  them.  Self-sacrifice  fascinates  them. 
An  Antony  leaving  wealth  for  voluntary  hardness 
could  do  more  than  an  Athanasius  or  a  Chrysostom 
to  win  "the  masses"  to  Jesus  Christ  to-day. 

Three  other  persons  deserve  brief  mention  here  as 
writers.  Methodius,  bishop  of  Patara  in  Lycia, — 
he  is  often  quoted  as  Methodius  of  Tyre,  but  that 
seems  to  be  a  mere  blunder, — was  a  voluminous,  but 
not  very  valuable  writer.  He  is  most  noteworthy  as 
representing  the  beginning  of  the  endeavor  to  break 
down  by  argument  the  influence  of  Origen,  whose 
writings  he  antagonized  with  some  bitterness,  and  as 
being  the  first  defender  of  Christian  teaching  against 
the  attacks  of  Porphyry,  an  eminent  heathen  writer 
of  these  da}rs.  Arnobius  was  an  eminent  teacher  of 
rhetoric  in  Africa,  when  the  Diocletian  persecution 
broke  out.  He  had  been  a  heathen,  and  so  well 
known  as  such  that  when  he  offered  himself  to  the 


Arnobius  and  Lactantius.  441 

Church  at  Sicca  as  a  convert,  the  Christians  feared 
and  distrusted  him  as  once  the  Christians  of  Jerusa- 
lem had  feared  St.  Paul.  But  the  convert  proved  his 
honesty  of  purpose  by  writing  in  the  midst  of  that 
bloody  time  a  long  treatise  in  seven  books  of  Dispu- 
tations against  the  Heathen,  A  greater  man  than  this, 
however,  was  another  African,  his  sometime  pupil, 
Lactantius,  whose  noble  Latin  style  has  won  for  him 
the  title  of  "  the  Christian  Cicero."  Invited  to  open 
a  school  of  rhetoric  in  Nicomedia,  then  the  place  of 
the  imperial  residence,  he  witnessed  with  sympathy 
the  horrors  of  the  persecution  there,  and  is  supposed 
to  have  become  a  convert  at  that  time  like  his  old 
teacher.  For  a  time  he  was  plunged  into  poverty  and 
distress,  but  when  Constantine  reached  the  imperial 
throne  he  took  knowledge  of  this  Christian  rhetorician 
and  made  him  tutor  to  his  son  Crispus.  Lactantius 
wrote  ten  books  of  Divine  Institutes,  as  an  introduc- 
tion to  true  religion  for  heathen  inquirers,  but  his 
most  interesting  work  to-day  is  his  history,  De  Morte 
Persecutorum,  [Concerning  the  Death  of  Persecutors). 
In  it  he  tells  the  story  of  the  Diocletian  persecution, 
and  traces  out  the  miserable  fate  of  all  the  persons 
chiefly  responsible  for  it. 

It  was  a  common  notion  among  the  ancients,  no 
lovers  of  the  sea,  that  every  tenth  wave  pouring  in 
on  an  exposed  coast  was  especially  awful  in  its  re- 
sistless sweep.  The  last  and  worst  of  the  great 
persecutions  was  felt  by  the  Church  to  be  such  a 
"  decuman."  The  attempt  of  mystics  to  make  out 
that   the    persecutions    themselves    numbered    ten, 


442  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

which  was  regarded  as  in  "some  sense  a  perfect 
number,  is  artificial  and  idle.  The  name  of  "  tenth 
wave  "  was  thoroughly  deserved. 

In  A.  D.  303,  the  Empire  was  governed  by  a  sort 
of  imperial  partnership.  Diocletian  and  Maximian 
were  Augusti.  Constantius  Chlorus  and  Galerius 
were  joined  with  them  under  the  lesser  title  of 
Caesars.  Maximian  administered  the  affairs  of  Italy 
and  Africa,  while  Diocletian,  who  had  set  his  royal 
residence  in  Nicomedia,  reserved  to  himself  the 
Asiatic  provinces.  Constantius  governed  Gaul  and 
Britain,  and  Galerius  had  the  oversight  of  the  prov- 
inces of  southeastern  Europe,  from  the  Adriatic  to 
the  Black  sea.  Meanwhile  Christianity  had  been 
for  forty  years  a  licensed  religion,  and  to  many  men 
persecution  must  have  seemed  a  thing  of  the  past. 
Christianity  was  receiving  multitudes  of  converts, 
Churches  were  building  on  every  side,  and  a  Chris- 
tian church  was  the  most  conspicuous  building  in 
Nicomedia  itself.  Some  of  the  chief  servants  of  the 
imperial  household  were  Christians,  and  Diocletian's 
own  wife  and  daughter  were  much  suspected  of  ad- 
hering secretly  to  the  new  faith.  What  changed  the 
Emperor's  mind  profoundly,  it  is  not  now  possible 
to  tell.  The  Caesar  Galerius,  his  son-in-law,  was  a 
bitter  foe  to  Christianity,  and  he  spent  much  of  the 
winter  of  302-303  at  Nicomedia.  Treasonable  plots 
are  said  to  have  been  discovered  among  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  household.  Whether  there  really  were 
such,  and  whether,  if  so,  they  were  really  counter- 
plots made  by  some  who  believed  themselves  marked 
for   ruin   by  Galerius,  we    cannot   say.     Diocletian 


The  Diocletian  Persecution.  443 

was  persuaded  that  Christianity  was  a  menace  to  the 
throne,  and  resolved  upon  its  extirpation. 

After  much  consultation  of  oracles  and  auguries  it 
was  resolved  to  take  February  23,  the  Termincdia, 
the  feast  of  the  God  of  Boundaries,  for  beginning  the 
process  which  was  to  bring  Christianity  to  a  termi- 
nation. That  morning  the  church,  which  stood  over 
against  the  palace,  was  torn  down,  and  the  next  day 
an  edict  was  issued  for  the  destruction  of  every 
church  building  in  the  Empire,  and  all  the  sacred 
books  of  Christians  everywhere,  and  ordering  that 
every  Christian  holding  public  office  should  lose  his 
rights  as  a  citizen,  and  that  the  members  of  the 
households  of  such  should  be  made  slaves.1  The 
forfeiture  of  civil  rights  would  seem  to  have  been 
soon  extended  to  all  Christians.  At  any  rate  every 
kind  of  torture  was  brought  to  bear  upon  them,  such 
as  no  Roman  citizen  might  suffer  without  the  Em- 
peror's express  command.  Men  were  strangled, 
were  drowned,  were  exposed  to  wild  beasts,  were 
roasted  over  slow  fires,  were  covered  with  pitch  and 
set  on  fire,  were  scraped  with  shells  till  their  flesh 
was  torn  from  their  bones,  were  scourged  horribly 
and  rubbed  with  vinegar  and  salt.  Women  were 
hung  by  the  heel  from  the  tops  of  pillars,  lowered 
into  cauldrons  of  boiling  oil,  given  over  to  the  more 
cruel  barbarities  of  brothel-keepers.  Eusebius  gives 
many  pages  to  the  story,  and  even  so  one  knows 
that  the  historian  had  touched  but  the  fringe  of  the 

1  This,  and  not  that  all  Christians  who  were  not  officials  should 
be  reduced  to  slavery,  would  seem  to  be  the  meaning.  We  here 
follow  Doctor  McGiffert  (Eusebius  p.  324,)  as  against  the  Dictionary 
of  Christian  Biography,  Art.  Diocletian. 


444  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

subject.     One  cannot  undertake  to  give  any  fair  idea 
of  the  martyrs  or  even  of  the  tortures  of  that  time. 

The  severity  of  the  persecution  varied,  of  course, 
with  the  mood  of  the  chief  ruler  in  each  of  the 
greater  districts  of  the  Empire,  but  Constantius  was 
the  only  one  that  cared  very  much,  probably,  to  hold 
back.  The  struggle  had  gone  on  for  two  years, 
when  Diocletian,  broken  in  health,  and  Maximian 
were  persuaded  to  abdicate  their  sovereignty.  The 
Caesars  Constantius  and  Galerius  took  their  places  as 
Augusti.  Diocletian  would  have  wished  to  make 
Constantine,  son  of  Constantius,  and  Maxentius,  son 
of  Maximian,  to  be  the  new  Ceesars;  but  Galerius 
overruled  his  weakened  will,  and  secured  the  ap- 
pointment of  two  followers  of  his  own,  Maximin 
and  Severus.  From  this  time  forward,  till  Con- 
stantine established  himself  as  sole  emperor,  the 
Empire  was  really  in  a  state  of  civil  war.  Maximin, 
as  ruler  of  Syria  and  Egypt,  was  a  persecutor  more 
horrible  than  Galerius,  and  in  those  regions  the  pur- 
secution  lasted  ten  }^ears,  303-313.  Into  the 
kaleidoscopic  political  changes  of  the  Empire  gen- 
erally we  must  not  enter  here.  Enough  to  say  that 
Galerius  died  miserably  in  311,  having  first  pro- 
claimed toleration  for  the  Christians  of  Asia  Minor, 
and  that  Constantine,  proclaimed  an  Augustus  by  his 
troops  on  his  father's  death  in  307,  found  himself  on 
the  death  of  Galerius  one  of  four  claimants  to  the 
imperial  title  and  power.  Constantine  and  Max- 
entius battled  for  the  supremac}^  over  the  West. 
Their  armies  met  at  the  Milvian  bridge,  a  mile  from 
Rome,  October  27,  311,  and  at  some  time  before  that 


The  Vision  of  Constantine.  445 

meeting  Constantine  had  a  vision.  He  saw  glowing 
in  the  sky  the  monogram  j?,  the  X  being  the  Greek 
letter  answering  to  our  cA,  and  the  P  answering  to 
our  r,  so  that  the  figure  was  a  monogram  of  the  name 
of  Christ.  Around  the  monogram  in  letters  of  light 
were  the  words,  "  Hoc  vince"  "  By  this  conquer," 
which  later  legend  enlarged  into  "In  hocsiyno  vinces." 
The  night  following  Constantine  had  a  dream.  Our 
Lord  himself  appeared  to  him,  and  bade  him  take 
the  Labarum,  the  familiar  standard  of  his  army,  with 
its  long  pole  and  transverse  arm,  already  forming  to 
every  Christian  eye  the  sign  of  the  cross,  from  which 
hung  the  embroidered  banner,  and  add  at  the  top  of  the 
staff  the  Christian  monogram  within  a  crown  of  gold. 
Constantine  did  so, — we  give  the  story  as  Eusebius 
gives  it,  to  whom  the  emperor  himself  related  it  in 
after  years,  and  confirmed  the  narrative  with  a 
solemn  oath, — and  beneath  that  standard  he  ad- 
vanced to  an  overwhelming  victory.  Maxentius, 
the  heathen  persecutor,  was  slain,  and  Constantine, 
not  yet  a  Christian,  but  more  than  half  a  believer, 
was  made  master  of  the  western  world.  Whether 
Constantine  could  tell  the  story  of  his  vision,  with 
precise  accuracy  after  fifteen  or  twenty  years  might 
be  doubted,  but  that  something  happened  to  him  at 
that  time,  which  seemed  to  him  and  others  super- 
natural, is  beyond  question.  The  triumphal  arch 
dedicated  to  him  within  five  years  by  the  Senate  and 
People  of  Rome  described  his  victory  as  coming 
"  instinctu  Divinitatis"  "  by  an  inspiration  from 
Deity."     That  was  the  feeling  of  the  time. 

The  triumph  of  Constantine  was  thus  the  triumph 


446  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

of  Christ.  Already  in  311  Constantine  had  put 
forth  an  edict  of  toleration.  In  313  when  Con- 
stantine and  Licinicus  had  become  lords  of  the  whole 
Empire,  and  had  agreed  to  rule  it  together,  they  put 
forth  the  Edict  of  Milan,  giving  to  Christians  the 
largest  freedom  to  believe,  to  worship,  to  hold  prop- 
erty in  the  Christian  name,  and  it  became  known 
that  practically  the  proscribed  religion  was  now  en- 
throned. Then  began  a  period  of  renewal  and  of 
triumph.  Churches  were  built  on  every  side, — 
Eusebius  describes  the  magnificent  structure  reared 
at  Tyre,  and  gives  us  in  full  the  oration,  rather  than 
sermon,  which  he  himself  pronounced  at  its  dedi- 
cation,— fugitives  returned  to  their  places,  new  con- 
verts flocked  to  the  standard  of  the  Cross.  The  age 
of  persecution  was  really  past.  The  more  danger- 
ous trial  of  prosperity  was  come.1 

1  The  story  of  the  Donatist  schism,  a  separation  of  the  Puritan 
order,  belongs  to  the  next  Age,  but  it  began  in  Carthage  in  311, 
ostensibly  because  the  new  bishop,  Cfcecilian,  had  been  con- 
secrated by  a  bishop  that  had  been  a  u  traditor"  one  who  in  the 
persecution  had  given  up  copies  of  the  "sacred  books"  to  be 
burned,  but  really  because  Csecilian  had  opposed  himself  to  the 
craze  for  honoring  martyrs  and  confessors  unduly.  Oddly  enough 
the  charge  against  Csecilian's  consecrator  broke  down  entirely 
under  strict  examination,  but  the  new  sect  received  a  number  of 
acknowledged  "  traditors  "  into  its  own  ranks. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

LAST  WORDS  ON  SOME  WORKINGS  OF  THE  CHURCH'S 
MIND  IN  THE  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE. 

REAT  deeds,  great  movements,  and  note- 
worthy men  have  occupied  us.  It  re- 
mains to  gather  up  some  notes  concern- 
ing the  Church's  prevailing  thought  and 
habit,  which  belong  to  the  very  centre 
of  its  life,  but  just  for  that  very  reason  elude  the 
historian's  endeavor  to  fasten  them  to  particular 
points  in  the  story.  Such  notes  may  be  grouped 
under  four  heads, — Organization,  Faith,  Theology, 
Worship. 

I.  Organization.  The  writer  of  this  book  has 
maintained  confidently  that  the  bishop  of  Ignatian 
phraseology  was  an  apostle,  only  of  less  dignity  and 
prestige  than  the  original  Apostles,  or  St.  Paul  with 
his  supernatural  sending.  From  a  Congregationalist 
scholar,  kind  and  wise,  he  has  received  a  most 
friendly,  but  naturally  an  unfavorable  criticism  of 
his  chapters  II.,  III.,  and  IV.,  as  read  in  proof- 
sheets.  The  present  writer  cannot  agree  with  his 
friend  in  some  points, — the  time  of  seeing  eye  to  eye 
is  not  yet, — but  he  is  much  interested  in  his  friend's 
suggestion  that  "the  Ignatian  bishop  is  not  a  diocesan 
bishop  (which  involves  the  subordination  of  several 
chief  local  pastors  to  a  non-resident  and  non-con- 
gregational   chief),    but    a    congregational    pastor." 

447 


448  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

The  writer  has  not  time  to  ask  his  friend  across  the 
sea  whether  he  would  suppose  that  the  Ephesian 
elders  of  Acts  xx.  were  in  charge  of  a  single  congre- 
gation, or  that  Ephesus  had  but  one  congregation 
when  Ignatius  was  there,  and  whether  he  would 
consider  many  bishops  or  one  to  be  the  Ignatian 
ideal  for  a  city  like  New  York.  He  supposes  that 
the  answer  would  be, — "  A  great  city  might  come  to 
have  many  congregations,  though  it  would  be  long 
before  this  loss  of  visible  unity  would  be  tolerated, 
but  even  then  they  could  meet  as  one  for  some  pur- 
poses, and  make  themselves  felt  as  one  Church,  and 
their  bishop  was  in  touch  with  them,  one  with 
them,  limited  by  the  practical  necessity  of  getting 
their  consent  and  cooperation,  as  the  lordly  bishop 
of  the  later  diocese  could  never  be."  That  seems  to 
be  quite  true,  and  worthy  of  solemn  consideration. 
The  present  writer  can  find  no  trace  of  government 
in  the  sense  of  making  rules  and  laius  by  anyone  but 
a  bishop  in  the  Post- Apostolic  Church.  Neither 
clergy  nor  laity  appear  to  him  as  having  ever  had 
more  than  a  consultative  voice  in  such  matters. 
But  the  bishop,  to  whom  the  exclusive  power  of 
final  decision  seems  to  have  been  entrusted,  was 
more  like  a  father  sitting  in  his  armchair  on  the 
family  hearth  than  like  a  monarch  unapproachably 
enthroned  over  a  kingdom.  His  authority  was 
always  limited  (a  very  practical  limitation)  by  the 
fact  that  he  must  live  in  daily  association  with  the 
people  for  whom  he  was  making  his  rules. 

The  tone  of  Church  government  in  this  age  was 
domestic.     In  the  next  it  was  imperial.     What  made 


The  Change  from  Custom  to  Canon.  449 

the  difference  ?  Largely,  one  may  think,  it  was  the 
drawing  together  of  Church  and  State.  Constantine 
valued  the  Christian.  Church  as  one  of  the  forces  that 
might  help  to  hold  the  empire  firm,  and  his  idea  of 
making  the  Church  strong  was  to  make  it  imperial, 
like  a  kingdom  of  this  world.  But  largely  too  the 
evolution  was  in  progress  before  Constantine's  con- 
version. Bishops  met  together  for  consultation. 
Bishops  agreed  on  policies.  Bishops  of  adjoining  dis- 
tricts formed  the  habit  of  meeting  in  council  at  fixed 
times.1  But  even  so  it  seems  to  have  been  under- 
stood at  first  that  their  agreements  were  not  laws. 
A  majority  vote  bound  no  dissenting  minority.  (Cf. 
pp.  387,  388.)  It  is  not  till  after  300  that  we  find 
councils  of  bishop  s  putting  their  agreements  on  rec- 
ord under  the  nam  3  of  Canons.  There  are  four  such 
— Eliberis  (Elvira,  now  Granada,  in  Spain)  with  nine- 
teen bishops,  about  305  ;  Ar elate  (Aries  in  Southern 
France)  with  thirty-three,  assembled  by  order  of 
Constantine  from  Gaul,  Italy,  Sicily,  North  Africa, 
and  Britain,  to  consider  the  Donatist  quarrel  (p.  446), 
in  314 ;  Ancyra  in  Galatia  with  eighteen,  in  the 
same  year;  and  Neo-Cmarea  in  Pontus,  a  little  later. 
A  famous  utterance  of  the  great  Ecumenical  council 
of  Nicaea,  which  was  itself  by  the  tremendous  moral 
force  of  its  decisions  a  long  step  in  the  way  toward 
regarding  a  council  as  a  legislature,  speaks  of  certain 
usages,  whereby  special  honor  and  authority  were 
conceded  to  the   bishop  of  the   chief  city  of  a  dis- 

lTertullian  (On  Fasting  xiii.)  refers  to  such  councils  held  in 
Greece,  as  if  they  were  a  novelty  characteristic  as  yet  of  that  re- 
gion. Cjpriau  seems  to  have  heen  the  man  who  first  made  such 
gatherings  customary  in  the  North  African  Church. 

CC 


450  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

trict.  "  Let  the  ancient  customs  Lave  force,"  says 
its  Canon  VI.,  "in  Egypt,  Libya,  Pentapolis,  so  that 
the  bishop  of  Alexandria  have  authority  over  all 
these  provinces,  since  the  like  is  customary  for  the 
bishop  of  Rome  also."  Here  Ave  find  old  "  customs  " 
just  hardening  into  "  canons,"  and  what  was  once  a 
precedent  which  it  was  a  grave  responsibility  to  dis- 
regard, becoming  a  law  which  it  would  be  a  sin  to 
break.  And  still  more  significant  is  the  close  of  the 
canon :  "If,  however,  two  or  three  bishops  shall  from 
natural  love  of  contradiction  oppose  the  common  suf- 
frage of  the  rest,  it  being  reasonable,  and  according 
to  the  canon  of  the  Church,  then  let  the  choice  of 
the  majority  prevail."  This  introduction  of  majority 
rule  is  revolutionary.  Some  of  us  who  cannot  call 
the  primitive  bishop  a  "  congregational  pastor,"  can 
recognize  that  he  was  chief  pastor  of  an  "independ- 
ent Church."  The  primitive  Church  polity  lies  some- 
where between  the  extremes  of  modern  Episcopacy 
and  modern  Independency. 

An  interesting  illustration  of  the  change  in  an  im- 
perial direction  is  found  in  the  study  of  Episcopal 
elections.  The  primitive  mode  of  election  would 
seem  to  have  been  a  choice  by  the  clergy  and  laity 
of  the  diocese,  ratified  or  vetoed  by  the  neighboring 
bishops.  In  Cyprian  we  find  traces  of  another  idea. 
The  bishop  is  to  be  chosen  in  the  presence  of  the 
people  who  know  him,  so  that  they  can  give  or  with- 
hold their  consent,  but  the  original  choice  rests  with 
the  bishops,  and  it  is  the  people  who  have  only  a  veto 
left.  It  is  manifest  that  as  the  bishops  developed 
the  habit  of  governing  together  by  mutual  agree- 


What  was  Included  in  the  Faith  f  451 

ment,  their  power  grew  also.  The  whole  machinery 
of  Church  government  gained  in  strength  and  lost 
in  flexibility.  It  would  seem  to  be  not  impossible 
that  some  day  a  great  Church  should  bring  together 
brethren  devoted  to  Independency  and  others  who, 
though  Episcopalians,  do  still  prefer  Episcopacy  to 
Prelacy,  and  try  again  the  experiment  of  a  really 
primitive  Church  Order.  Yet  for  both  parties  it 
would  be  necessary  to  unlearn  the  habits  of  a  life- 
time, to  enter  into  the  polity  of  Cyprian  and  Firmil- 
ian  and  Dionysius. 

II.  The  Catholic  Faith.  Under  this  head  there  is 
little  more  to  say.  It  has  been  pointed  out  that  the 
Church  felt  deeply  the  distinction  between  believing 
a  body  of  doctrine,  and  subscribing  to  a  form  of 
words,  and  examples  have  been  given  (pp.  262,  291) 
of  differing  forms  in  which  eminent  men  did  em- 
body what  they  held  to  be  the  essentials  of  Chris- 
tian thought.  It  may  be  worth  while  to  note  here 
two  questions  that  have  come  up  in  modern  times  as 
to  what  those  essentials  really  included. 

(1)  The  earliest  creed-forms,  unlike  those  which 
have  survived  to  our  day  under  the  names  of  "  the 
Apostles*  Creed"  and  "the  Nicene  Creed,"  speak 
strongly  of  punishment  by  everlasting  fire,  as  over 
against  the  glory  of  the  everlasting  life.  Their  state- 
ments are  those  of  Holy  Scripture  and  unquestion- 
ably true,  but  it  has  been  seriously  asked  by  some, — 
"Does  this  Catholic  Faith,  which  you  call  a  Divine 
Revelation,  leave  us  freedom  to  believe  that  there 
may  be  deliverance  from  the  everlasting  fire,  because 
real  repentance  and  salvation,  for  every  spirit  that 


452  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

God  has  made  ?  "  Origen's  case  gives  a  fair  answer 
to  that  question.  He  may  not  have  settled  such  a 
view  as  an  absolute  conviction  in  his  own  mind,  but 
he  certainly  thought  much  of  it  as  a  possibility,  and 
sometimes  expressed  himself  in  terms  which  implied 
that  it  was  true.  He  certainly  held  that  a  man  could 
think  it,  and  be  loyal  to  the  Catholic  Faith,  and  he 
was  either  not  condemned — there  is  no  record  of  it 
— for  so  thinking,  or  if  he  was  so  condemned  by  any 
authority,  a  greater  weight  of  authority  upheld  him, 
as  regards  liberty  of  belief. 

(2)  On  the  other  hand,  a  question  has  arisen  in 
these  days,  "  Can  we  hold  the  Catholic  Faith,  and  yet 
give  up  the  doctrine  of  a  bodily  resurrection  ?  "  Here 
too  the  earlier  creed-forms  use  language  specially 
trying  to  some  modern  ears.  For  our  familiar  "res- 
urrection of  the  body  "  they  more  often  read  "  res- 
urrection of  the  flesh."  Yet  certainly  it  was  not  un- 
derstood to  be  revealed  that  some  or  any  of  the  iden- 
tical particles  which  a  man  was  wearing  when  he 
died  should  be  returned  to  him  again  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. Yet  that  a  man  should  live  a  bodily  life  again, 
and  in  a  body  of  flesh  and  bone,  was  held  to  be  a 
necessary  belief.  It  has  been  charged  that  the  Alex- 
andrians, Clement,  Origen,  even  great  Athanasius, 
held  to  a  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  which  made 
that  great  experience  to  be  the  rising  of  a  freed 
spirit  to  meet  God,  when  loosed  from  the  bondage  of 
corruption  at  death,  and  in  fact,  the  escape  of  the 
soul  from  the  body,  rather  than  the  return  of  the 
soul  to  the  forms  of  bodily  existence.  The  present 
writer  has  never  seen  any  passage  quoted  to  show 


The  Faith  Fixed,   Theology  Free.  453 

that  any  Christian  of  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  thought 
that  "resurrection  of  the  flesh"  could  mean  escape 
out  of  the  flesh.  He  ventures  to  say  that  the  idea 
of  a  "  spiritual  body  "  which  is  not  a  material  body, 
and  a  resurrection  which  is  past  already,  would 
have  been  denounced  by  the  whole  Catholic  Church 
of  the  second  and  third  centuries,  not  as  bad  theology, 
but  as  heresy. 

III.  Catholic  Theology.  The  difference  between 
heresy  and  bad  theology  is  an  important  one.  It  is 
fair  to  suppose  that  among  Origen's  most  devoted 
friends  there  were  many  who  would  have  defended 
him  manfully  against  the  charge  of  heresy,  but 
thought  his  Restorationist  views  fantastic  and  ut- 
terly unfounded.  When  he  first  began  to  put  them 
forth  at  Alexandria,  we  do  not  hear  that  anybody 
threatened  him  with  excommunication,  but  people 
criticized  him  and  made  themselves  unpleasant. 
Outside  the  bounds  of  "  the  faith,"  there  was  a 
very  general  agreement  among  Christians  in  a  sys- 
tem of  doctrine  which  was  so  nearly  universal  among 
them  that  it  may  fairly  be  described  as  "the  Catholic 
Theology."  It  was  neither  infallible  nor  unchange- 
able. In  the  second  century  it  was  a  part  of  Catholic 
Theology  to  believe,  as  Justin  and  Irenseus  did,  in  a 
pre -millennial  Advent  of  our  Lord.  In  the  third 
century  it  came  to  be  part  of  Catholic  Theology  to 
regard  the  "Millennium  "  as  a  symbolic  phrase  cov- 
ering the  present  experiences  of  the  Christian  Church 
on  earth,  But  what  the  primitive  Church  held  as  a 
theology,  believing  that  it  had  received  the  same 
from  its  first  Apostles,  is  certainly  interesting.     If 


454  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

we  think  that  that  theology  differs  from  that  of  the 
New  Testament,  it  is  worth  while  to  study  afresh  to 
see  how  they  (or  perchance  we)  could  make  such  a 
mistake.  A  few  points  only  will  be  named  here, 
points  wherein  the  modern  Christian  is  particularly 
apt  to  differ,  and  to  feel  surprised  that  early  Chris- 
tianity could  have  judged  thus. 

1.  It  has  already  been  indicated  that,  from  Justin 
Martyr  down,  Christians  held  that  Regeneration  was 
an  act  of  God,  accomplished  in  the  Sacrament  of 
Baptism,  and  applicable  even  to  unconscious  infants. 
To  show  that  such  ideas  are  even  of  older  date,  we 
may  quote  Barnabas,  who  in  Chap.  XI.  points  out 
Old  Testament  foreshadowings  of  Baptism,  among 
them  the  "  tree  planted  by  the  rivers  of  water  "  in 
Psalm  i.,  and  goes  on  to  say  that  we  "  descend  into 
the  water  full  of  sins  and  defilement,  but  come  up 
bearing  fruit  in  our  heart,  having  the  fear  of  God 
and  trust  in  Jesus  in  our  spirit."  So  Hennas  (Si- 
militude ix.  16)  asks  why  certain  stones  were  brought 
up  out  of  a  pit  before  being  used  for  the  building  of  a 
tower,  "  They  were  obliged,"  lie  is  told,  u  to  ascend 
through  water  in  order  that  they  might  be  made 
alive ;  for  unless  they  laid  aside  the  deadness  of  their 
life,  they  could  not  in  any  other  way  enter  into  the 
Kingdom  of  God."  The  reference  to  St.  John  iii.  5, 
is  obvious.  The  explanation  presently  goes  on  to 
say  that  "  before  a  man  bears  the  name  of  the  Son  of 
God  he  is  dead ;  but  when  he  receives  the  seal,  he 
lays  aside  his  deadness  and  obtains  life.  The  seal, 
then,  is  the  water ;  they  descend  into  the  water  dead, 


The  Doctrine  of  Confirmation.  455 

and  they  arise  alive." l  Not  less  can  be  the  meaning 
of  Ignatius  when  (Ephes.  xviii.  5)  he  says  that  our 
Lord  "  was  born  and  baptized  that  by  His  passion  He 
might  purify  the  water." 

2.  We  have  just  heard  Hernias  speaking  of  Bap- 
tism as  receiving  "the  Seal."  That  was  properly 
the  name  of  one  of  the  ceremonies  of  Baptism,  which 
was  understood  to  have  a  special  meaning  and  value 
of  its  own,  the  anointing  of  the  forehead  with  oil  and 
laying  on  of  hands,  by  which  was  understood  to  be 
conveyed  a  certain  special  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as 
an  indwelling  power.  It  was  felt  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  had  always  acted  upon  men  from  the  Crea- 
tion, yet  St.  John  had  recognized  an  operation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  a  Breathing  of  the  Breath  of  God 
in  Christian  days,  so  much  greater  than  former  times 
had  known,  that  he  had  even  said  of  the  days  when 
our  Lord  was  upon  earth,  "  There  was  no  Breath  yet" 
— that  is  the  literal  meaning  of  St.  John  vii.  39, — 
"because  that  Jesus  ivas  not  yet  glorified.11  This  new 
Breathing  of  God,  which  had  fallen  upon  the  Apos- 
tles in  their  upper  room,  later  Christians  believed 
that  thejr  received  in  turn  through  the  laying  on  of 
apostolic  hands.  This  sacramental  form,  which  gen- 
erally took  place  as  one  of  the  baptismal  ceremonies, 
but  might  be  separated  from  them,  as  in  the  case  of 
persons  baptized  in  sickness,  was  called  "  the  Seal 
of  the  Lord,"  or  simply  "  the  Seal,"  or  sometimes 

1  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  very  passage  in  which  Hermaa 
shows  so  high  a  sense  of  the  value  of  Baptism  is  one  where  his 
vision  is  concerned  with  the  Old  Testament  worthies.  He  seems 
to  imply  that  their  salvation  also  depends  on  being  admitted  into 
the  membership  of  Christ's  Kingdom  by  this  door. 


456  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 


"the  Unction."  In  modern  timer,  it  lias  been  known 
as  "  the  Unction  "  in  the  Eastern  Churches,  and  as 
"Confirmation"  in  the  West.  Scripture  references 
for  it  were  found  in  Acts  viii.  5-19,  xix.  1-6 ;  Heb. 
vi.  1-2 ;  Eph.  i.  13,  where  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  "  sealing  "  is  "  after  that  ye  believed"  and  more 
doubtfully  in  1  St.  John  ii.  20,  27. 

We  have  no  full  account  of  the  ceremonies  of 
Baptism  till  we  approach  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury. Then  we  find  in  Tertuliian  (Be  Baptismo, 
vi.,  viii.).  "  Not  that  we  obtain  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
the  baptismal  waters,  but  having  been  cleansed  in 
the  water  under  the  ministry  of  the  angel,  we  are 
there  prepared  for  the  Holy  Spirit.  .  .  .  Then 
on  stepping  forth  from  the  font  we  are  anointed  with 
consecrated  oil, — a  custom  derived  from  the  ancient 
discipline,  in  which  men  used  to  be  anointed  priests 
with  oil  out  of  a  horn,  since  the  time  when  Aaron 
was  anointed  by  Moses,  from  which  he  is  called  a 
'Christ'  from  the  'Chrism,'  that  is,  the  unction  em- 
ployed. And  this  unction  gave  His  name  to  our 
Lord,  being  spiritually  performed,  because  He  was 
anointed  with  the  Spirit  by  God  His  Father.  .  .  . 
Thus  in  our  case  also,  though  i;he  unction  takes 
place  in  the  flesh,  the  benefit  is  i  spiritual  benefit, 
just  as,  in  the  actual  Baptism,  the  immersion  in  the 
water  is  a  carnal  transaction,  but  has  a  spiritual 
effect  in  our  deliverance  from  our  sins.  After  that 
the  hand  is  laid  on  us  in  benediction,  invoking  and 
inviting  the  Holy  Ghost.  .  .  .  Then  the  most 
Holy  Spirit  comes  down  willingly  from  the  Father 
upon    the    bodies    which   have    been   cleansed   and 


Cyprian  on  the  Laying  on  of  Hands.        457 

blessed.  He  broods  over  the  waters  of  Baptism, 
as  if  recognizing  there  His  ancient  throne." 

So  also  Tertullian  argues  in  his  book  On  the  Res- 
urrection of  the  Flesh  (viii.),  that  it  is  only  through 
the  bod}'  that  the  soul  is  restored  to  God :  "  The 
flesh  is  washed,  that  the  soul  may  be  rid  of  its  stains  ; 
the  flesh  is  anointed,  that  the  soul  may  be  conse- 
crated ;  the  flesh  is  sealed,1  that  the  soul  also  may 
be  protected;  the  flesh  is  overshadowed  by  the  im- 
position of  the  hand,  that  the  soul  also  may  be  illu- 
minated by  the  Spirit ;  the  flesh  is  fed  with  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ,  that  the  soul  also  may  be  made 
fat  from  God/' 

St.  Cyprian  had  occasion  to  speak  much  of  this 
laying  on  of  hands,  because  his  opponents  in  the  Re- 
baptism  controversy  insisted  that  the  laying  on  of 
hands  was  sufficient  for  receiving  schismatics  into 
the  Church.  Did  they  suppose,  he  asked,  that  schis- 
matical  bodies  could  make  men  members  of  Christ, 
but  could  not  give  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  If  they  had 
not  the  Spirit,  how  could  they  do  any  spiritual  work  ? 
From  him,  however,  we  will  quote  but  a  single  phrase. 
He  has  been  alluding  to  the  visit  of  the  Apostles  to 
Samaria  to  lay  hands  on  certain  persons  already  bap- 
tized, and  he  adds  that  this  "  is  still  our  usage,  that 
those  who  are  baptized  in  the  Church  should  be  pre- 
sented to  the  prelates  of  the  Church,  and  by  means 
of  our  prayer  and  the  laying  on  of  our  hand  should 
obtain  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  be  perfected  with  the 
Seal  of  the  Lord"     {Letters  lxxii.  9). 

Occasional  allusions  appear  in  various  writers  of 
'The  allusion  is  to  the  signing  with  the  cross. 


458  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

our  period,  in  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  in  Irenseus,  in 
Clement,  Origen,  Firmilian,  in  Eusebius,  who  ex- 
pounds the  twenty-third  Psalm  and  says  that  of 
course  all  Christians  will  know  what  that  oil  was 
with  which  their  heads  were  anointed.  We  will 
make  but  one  more  quotation,  from  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions1  (ii.  32),  "What  if  a  man  should  speak 
against  a  bishop  ?  through  whom  the  Lord  gave  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  be  in  you  in  the  laying  on  of  hands, 
.  .  .  through  whom  ye  were  sealed  with  the  oil 
of  gladness  and  the  ointment  of  understanding ; 
through  whom  ye  were  declared  sons  of  light; 
through  whom  the  Lord  in  your  Illumination,2  bear- 
ing witness  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hand  of  the 
bishop,  extended  to  each  of  you  the  sacred  voice, 
saying,  4  Thou  art  My  son ;  this  day  have  I  begotten 
thee.'  Through  thy  bishop  God  adopteth  thee  for 
His  son,  O  man  :  recognize,  O  son,  the  right  hand 
which  is  thy  mother ;  love  him  who  after  God  was 
thy  father,  and  reverence  him." 

This  rite  has  been  preserved  by  Oriental,  Roman, 
Lutheran,  and  Anglican  Christians,  the  Greek  Church 
allowing  priests  to  be  the  ministers  of  it  with  chrism 
blessed  by  the  bishop,  Romans  and  Anglicans  limit- 
ing it  to  bishops.  In  the  Roman  Church  the  lay- 
ing on  of  hands  has  almost  disappeared,  being  rep- 

1  This  is  a  curious  collection  of  materials,  largely  the  work  of  a 
fourth  century  forger,  who  is  responsible  also  for  the  interpolated 
edition  of  the  Letters  of  Ignatius.  The  passage  here  quoted 
bears  internal  marks  of  being  genuinely  ancient.  So  at  least  says 
Dr.  Mason  in  his  valuable  and  scholarly  study,  "  The  Relation  of 
Confirmation  to  Baptism, ' '  320. 

2  Illumination  was  a  favorite  name  for  Baptism  in  the  ancient 
Church. 


Doctrine  of  Eucharist  as  Sacrifice.  459 

resented  by  the  extending  of  the  hand  toward  the 
candidates  kneeling  before  the  bishop,  but  the  anoint- 
ing is  made  prominent.  Among  Anglicans,  the  anoint- 
ing has  been  disused  as  not  having  any  certain  war- 
rant in  Scripture,  and  the  laying  on  of  hands  with 
prayer  is  regarded  as  the  essential  of  the  rite.  A 
curious  movement  for  the  restoration  of  such  a  lay- 
ing on  of  hands  agitated  American  Baptists  and 
distracted  many  of  their  Churches  in  the  middle  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  the  "  Six  Principle  Baptists  " 
planting  themselves  on  the  passage  Heb.  vi.  1,  2. 

3.  Of  the  early  teachings  about  the  Eucharist  as 
a  sacrament  of  feeding,  much  has  been  said  already, 
especially  on  pp.  270-276.  We  will  only  add  here  a 
few  words  of  Ignatius,  to  carry  the  testimonies  closer 
to  Apostolic  times.  To  the  Ephesians  (xx.)  he  writes 
of  Christians  as  ''breaking  one  Bread,  which  is  the 
medicine  of  immortality,  and  the  antidote  that  we 
should  not  die,  but  live  for  ever  in  Jesus  Christ." 
Again  he  speaks  to  the  Smyrnaeans  (vii.)  of  certain 
heretics,  and  says  that  "  they  abstain  from  Eucharist 
and  prayer  because  they  allow  not  that  the  Eucharist 
is  the  Flesh  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  which  suf- 
fered for  our  sins,  and  which  the  Father  of  His 
goodness  raised  up." 

But  there  is  another  side  of  early  Eucharistic  doc- 
trine of  which  something  ought  to  be  said  here.  The 
Eucharist  was  universally  regarded  as  being  not  only 
a  Sacrament,  but  a  Sacrifice.  It  may  help  toward 
the  understanding  of  this  view  to  mention  that  the 
popular  notion  that  our  Lord  offered  and  completed 
His  own  perfect  Sacrifice  on  the  hill  Calvary,  is  a 


460  The  Post- Apostolic  Aye. 

mistake.  The  offering  of  sacrifice,  in  the  higher 
sense  of  that  phrase,  was  not  coincident  with  the 
victim's  death.  Sacrifice — at  least,  animal  sacrifice 
— consisted  in  bringing  before  God  in  an  appointed 
place,  and  in  solemn  form,  a  body  which  had  passed 
through  death.  This  our  Lord  did,  when  He  was 
fulfilling  the  types  of  the  Old  Law,  by  taking  His 
Body,  passed  through  death  to  a  new  life,  and  pre- 
senting Himself  with  it  in  the  Heavenly  Places.  It 
is  the  doctrine  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  that 
our  Lord  is  everlastingly  a  High  Priest,  that  Heaven 
is  the  place  of  His  sacrificial  service,  and  that  He 
must  of  necessity  "  have  somewhat  also  to  offer  "  (Heb. 
viii.  3).  The  early  Christians  had  no  notion  of  offer- 
ing a  new  propitiation,  or  making  a  fresh  sacrifice,  a 
repeated  immolation,  of  Jesus  Christ,  but  regarding 
Him  as  offering  in  Heaven  a  memorial  of  His  Death, 
as  a  Sacrifice  that  never  failed,  they  regarded  the 
Eucharist  as  a  companion  memorial  instituted  by 
our  Lord  here  below,  as  a  means  whereby  His  cove- 
nant people  might  take  part  with  Him  in  His  offer- 
ing of  Himself  above.  What  the  Jewish  Church 
had  done  blindly  with  its  bloody  sacrifices,  showing 
the  Lord's  death  till  lie  come,  that  the  Christian  did 
clearly  with  its  unbloody  offering  of  memorial  bread 
and  wine.  This  idea  made  Malachi's  prediction 
(i.  11),  u  My  Name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gen- 
tiles, and  in  every  place  incense  shall  be  offered  unto 
My  Name,  and  a  pure  offering,"  a  great  favorite  among 
Christians. 

Thus  Justin  Martyr  (Dialogue  with   Trypho  xli.), 
"  Hence  God  speaks  by  the  mouth  of  Malachi,     .     . 


Justin  and  Irenseus  on  Sacrifice.  461 

He  then  speaks  of  those  Gentiles,  namely  us, 
who  in  every  place  offer  sacrifices  to  Him,  i.  e.,  the 
Bread  of  the  Eucharist,  and  also  the  Cup  of  the  Eu- 
charist, affirming  both  that  we  glorify  His  Name, 
and  that  you  profane  it."  And  again  in  the  same 
book  (cxvi.,  cxvii.),  "  We  are  the  true  high-priestly 
race  of  God,  as  even  God  Himself  bears  witness, 
saying  that  in  every  place  among  the  Gentiles  sacri- 
fices are  presented  unto  Him,  well-pleasing  and  pure. 
Now  God  receives  sacrifices  from  no  one  except 
through  His  priests.  Accordingly,  God  anticipating 
all  the  sacrifices  which  we  offer  through  this  Name, 
and  which  Jesus  the  Christ  enjoined  us  to  offer,  i.  e., 
in  the  Eucharist  of  the  Bread  and  the  Cup,  and 
which  are  presented  by  Christians  in  all  places 
throughout  the  world,  bears  witness  that  they  are 
well-pleasing  to  Him.  .  .  .  You  assert  that  God 
does  not  accept  the  sacrifices  of  those  who  dwelt 
then  in  Jerusalem,  and  were  called  Israelites,  but 
says  that  He  is  pleased  with  the  prayers  of  that 
nation  then  dispersed,  and  calls  their  prayers  sacri- 
fices. Now  that  prayers  and  giving  of  thanks  offered 
by  worthy  men,  are  the  only  sacrifices  that  are  per- 
fect and  well-pleasing  before  God,  I  also  maintain. 
For  such  alone  have  Christians  undertaken  to  offer, 
even  in  the  remembrance  effected  by  their  solid 
and  liquid  food,  whereby  the  suffering  of  the  Son  of 
God,  which  He  endured,  is  brought  to  mind." 

Irenseus  has  the  same  mind.  In  his  book  Against 
All  Heresies,  (IV.  xvii.  5;  xviii.  1,  2),  we  find  him 
saying,  "  Again,  giving  directions  to  His  disciples  to 
offer   to    God   the    first-fruits    of   His   own    created 


462  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

tilings, — not  as  if  He  stood  in  need  of  them,  but 
that  they  might  be  themselves  neither  unfruitful 
nor  ungrateful, — He  took  that  created  thing  bread, 
and  gave  thanks,  and  said,  This  is  My  Body.  And 
the  cup,  likewise,  which  is  part  of  that  creation  to 
which  we  belong,  He  confessed  to  be  His  blood,  and 
taught  the  New  Oblation  of  the  New  Covenant, 
which  the  Church  receiving  from  the  Apostles  offers 
to  God  throughout  all  the  world."  Then  follows 
the  quotation  from  Malachi,  and  then  we  have  pres- 
ently,— "The  Oblation  of  the  Church,  therefore, 
which  the  Lord  gave  instructions  should  be  offered 
throughout  all  the  world,  is  accounted  with  God  a 
pure  sacrifice,  and  is  acceptable  to  Him,  not  that  He 
stands  in  need  of  a  sacrifice  from  us,  but  that  he 
who  offers  is  himself  glorified,  in  what  he  does  offer, 
if  his  gift  be  accepted.  .  .  .  And  the  class  of 
oblations  in  general  has  not  been  set  aside.  For 
there  were  both  oblations  there,  and  there  are  obla- 
tions here.  Sacrifices  there  were  among  the  people ; 
sacrifices  there  are,  too,  in  the  Church.  But  the 
species  alone  has  been  changed,  inasmuch  as  the  of- 
fering is  now  made  not  by  slaves,  but  by  freemen." 
So  also,  in  a  fragment  (xxxvii.),  "  Those  who  have 
become  acquainted  with  the  secondary  constitutions 
of  the  Apostles,  are  aware  that  the  Lord  instituted 
a  New  Oblation  in  the  New  Covenant,  according  to 
Malachi,  the  prophet.  .  .  .  For  we  make  an 
Oblation  to  God  of  the  Bread  and  the  Cup  of  Bless- 
ing, giving  Him  thanks  in  that  He  has  commanded 
the  earth  to  bring  forth  these  fruits  for  our  nourish- 
ment.    And  then,  when  we  have  perfected  the  Obla- 


The  Alexandrians  on  Sacrifice.  463 

tion,  we  invoke  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  He  may  ex- 
hibit1 this  Sacrifice,  both  the  Bread  the  Bocly  of 
Christ,  and  the  Cup  the  Blood  of  Christ,  in  order 
that  the  receivers  of  these  antitypes  may  obtain  re- 
mission of  sins  and  life  eternal.  Those  persons, 
then,  who  perform  these  Oblations  in  remembrance 
of  the  Lord  do  not  fall  in  with  Jewish  views,  but 
performing  the  service  after  a  spiritual  manner,  they 
shall  be  called  sons  of  wisdom." 

So  we  find  Apollonius,  a  Roman  Senator,  martyred 
in  the  reign  of  Commodus,  replying  when  called 
upon  to  sacrifice,  "  As  to  sacrifices,  I  and  all  Chris- 
tians offer  a  bloodless  sacrifice  to  God."2  And  so 
Tertullian  speaks  of  the  Eucharist  as  "a  Sacrifice," 
"  the  Sacrificial  Prayers,"  and  of  "  standing  at  the 
Altar  of  God"  {On  Prayer,  xviii.,  xix. ;  On  the 
Dress  of  Women  II.  xi.).  Cyprian  is  full  of  such 
language.  Even  the  Alexandrians,  while  mostly 
hunting  for  allegorical  applications  of  all  doctrine, 
recognize  this  as  the  doctrine  which  they  are  to 
allegorize.  Clement  calls  the  Eucharist  "  the  Obla- 
tion," and  says  that  Melchizedek's  offering  of  bread 
and  wine  furnished  "  consecrated  food  for  a  type 
of  the  Eucharist"  (Stromata  I.  xix. ;  IV.  xxv.). 
Origen  also  parallels  Christian  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons with  Jewish  priests  and  Levites  {Horn,  on  Jere- 
miah xii.  3),  declares  that  in  the  Eucharist  we  plead 
the  death  of  Christ,  and  "  this  is  the  only  memorial 

'Rather,  "that  He  may  set  forth."  or  "that  He  may  declare 
this  Sacrifice,  the  Bread  to  be  the  Body  of  Christ,"  etc,  Of.  p.  474. 

'The  words  are  quoted  by  Hardy,  Christianity  and  the  Roman 
Government,  202,  from  a  recently  discovered  account  of  this  mar- 
tyrdom. 


464  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

that  makes  God  favorable  toward  men  "  (On  LeviU 
xiii.  3).  And  in  his  Homilies  on  Joshua  (xi.)  we 
have  these  words :  "  But  when  thou  seest  Gentiles 
coming  in  to  the  faith,  Churches  built,  Altars  not 
sprinkled  with  the  blood  of  cattle,  but  consecrated 
with  the  precious  Blood  of  Christ, — when  thou  seest 
Priests  and  Levites  ministering  not  the  blood  of 
bulls  and  of  goats,  but  the  Word  of  God  through 
the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  then  say  that  Jesus 
hath  succeeded  Moses  and  obtained  the  princedom, 
not  Jesus1  the  son  of  Nun,  but  Jesus  the  Son  of 
God." 

It  must  be  observed,  however,  that  the  Church 
was  slow  to  disentangle  the  words  used  of  heathen 
and  Jewish  sacrifices  from  their  old  associations. 
Thus  Tertullian  will  not  use  the  Latin  word  sacri- 
ficare  of  any  Christian  sacrifices.  "  We  do  not  sacri- 
fice (sacrificemus)  for  others,"  he  says  (Apol.  x.)  "for 
the  same  reason  that  we  do  not  for  ourselves."  But 
he  uses  offerre  sacrificium  and  offerre  alone  with  per- 
fect freedom,  to  describe  a  Christian  service.  Of 
the  two  Latin  words  for  altar,  ara  was  not  used  by 
Christians  at  first.  They  had  no  aras,  they  said. 
But  they  used  altare  freely.  Tertullian,  however, 
begins  to  use  the  phrase  Ara  Dei.  So  with  two 
Greek  words  for  altar.  Using  one,  they  said  they 
had  no  altars ;  using  another,  they  gloried  in  hav- 
ing them.  They  were  slow  to  take  up  the  word 
"priest."     They  had  been  so  accustomed  to  connect 

'Jesus  is  the  Greek  form  of  the  name  which  when  we  are  trans- 
lating from  Hebrew  we  call  Joshua.  It  stands  twice  in  our  com- 
mon version  of  the  New  Testament,  when  it  is  the  name  of  the 
successor  of  Moses, — Acts  vii.  45;  Heb.  iv.  8. 


Early  Views  of  the  Sabbath  Idea.  465 

the  word  with  technicalities  of  blood  and  fire,  that 
they  were  slow  to  see  that  its  only  essential  meaning 
was  that  which  belonged  to  the  Priesthood  of  our 
Lord,  and  its  truest  application  to  one  who  repre- 
sented Him.  When  at  last  this  idea  began  to  be 
grasped  in  the  Latin-speaking  Church,  sacerdos  was 
for  some  time  an  exclusive  title  of  the  bishop.  He 
alone  was  so  fully  commissioned  to  represent  the 
Heavenly  High -Priest,  as  that  he  might  even  wear 
the  title  of  "  priest." 

4.  It  is  very  commonly  held  to-day  that  the  law 
of  earthly  sacrifice  was  so  fulfilled  by  our  Lord, 
that  it  has  no  further  application  in  Christian  times. 
The  early  Christians  did  not  think  so.  But  they 
did  speak  in  just  that  tone  of  a  law  now  commonly 
held  to  be  of  strictest  application  to  the  Christian 
conscience, — the  law  of  the  Sabbath.  In  Christ, 
they  said,  we  have  entered  into  that  rest  which  the 
Jewish  Sabbaths  meagrely  prefigured.  It  was  one 
of  their  boasts  that  they  did  not  "  Sabbatize." 

So  we  read  in  Barnabas  (xv.)  '*  One  properly 
resting  sanctifies  it,  when  we  ourselves,  having 
received  the  promise,  wickedness  no  longer  existing, 
and  all  things  having  been  made  new  by  the  Lord, 
shall  be  able  to  work  righteousness."  Then  he 
quotes  from  Isaiah  Your  new  moons  and  your  Sab- 
baths I  cannot  endure,  and  explains  it  as  meaning, 
"Your  present  Sabbaths  are  not  acceptable  to  Me, 
but  that  is  which  I  have  made,  when  giving  rest  to 
all  things,  I  shall  make  a  beginning  of  the  eighth  day, 
that  is,  a  beginning  of  another  world."  "  Where- 
fore also,"  Barnabas  goes  on,  "we  keep  the  eighth 
DD 


466  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

day  with  joy  fulness,  the  day  also  on  which  Jesus 
rose  again  from  the  dead." 

We  should  naturally  take  this  as  including  after 
all  a  transference  of  the  weekly  rest  from  the  Sab- 
bath to  the  Lord's  Day,  and  so  we  should  understand 
Ignatius,  describing  Christians  (JMagnes.  ix.)  as  "  No 
longer  Sabbatizing,  but  living  according  to  the  Lord's 
Day,"  though  the  last  is  a  peculiar  phrase  and  not  the 
same  as  "  observing  the  Lord's  Day,"  but  later  writers 
give  us  no  choice.  These  early  Christians  kept  no 
weekly  day  of  rest  at  all.  The  author  of  the  Address 
to  Diognetus  (iv.)  says  of  the  Jews,  "  As  to  their 
scrupulosity  concerning  meats,  and  their  superstition 
as  respects  the  Sabbaths,  and  their  boasting  about 
circumcision,  and  their  fancies  about  fasting  and  the 
new  moons,  which  are  utterly  ridiculous  and  un- 
worthy of  notice,  I  do  not  think  that  you  require  to 
learn  anything  from  me.  ...  To  speak  falsely 
of  God  as  if  He  forbade  us  to  do  what  is  good  on  the 
Sabbath  days, — how  is  this  not  impious?"  Nor 
does  he  mean  to  condemn  only  some  Rabbinical 
notions,  for  in  his  next  chapter  he  says  expressly  of 
the  Christians  that  they  do  not  lead  a  life  "  marked 
out  by  any  singularity."  Certainly,  refusing  to  do 
work  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  would  have  been 
a  very  great  singularity.  It  is  just  such  a  singularity 
of  the  Jews  that  marks  the  contrast. 

In  like  manner  Justin  Martyr  sa}^s  {Dialogue  with 
Trypho  xviii.,  xxiii.),  "  We  too  would  observe  the 
fleshly  circumcision,  and  the  Sabbaths,  and  in  short, 
all  the  feasts,  if  we  did  not  know  for  what  reason 
they  were  enjoined  you, — namely,  on  account  of  your 


The  Early  Lord's  Day  no  Sabbath.  467 

transgressions  and  the  hardness  of  }rour  hearts." 
He  goes  on  to  claim  (xxiii.)  than  neither  Enoch  nor 
any  other  of  the  early  Patriarchs  was  circumcised  or 
observed  Sabbaths.  Then  he  appeals  to  Trypho. 
"  Do  you  see  that  the  elements  are  not  idle  and  keep 
no  Sabbaths  ?  Remain  as  you  were  born.  For  if 
there  was  no  need  of  circumcision  before  Abraham, 
or  of  the  observance  of  Sabbaths,  of  feasts  and  sacri- 
fices, before  Moses,  no  more  need  is  there  of  them 
now." 

We  ma}r  think  Justin  greatly  mistaken  both  in 
thinking  that  a  weekly  rest-day  was  not  ordered 
before  Moses,  and  in  holding  that  a  good  Christian 
needed  no  such  day,  but  we  must  see  that  he  despises 
the  idea  of  resting  on  one  day  in  seven,  and  has  no  idea 
of  defending  himself  against  the  charge  of  breaking 
the  Sabbath  by  saying, i4 1  rest  on  the  first  day  of  the 
week  instead."  1  Of  course  the  Lord's  Day  was  deeply 
marked  from  the  first  as  a  day  of  religious  observ- 
ance. There  was  a  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist 
in  every  congregation,  and  every  Christian  was  ex- 
pected to  communicate,  on  that  day.  In  Justin 
Martyr's  time,  we  have  seen,  the  deacons  would 
carry  portions  of  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  to 
those  who  were  prevented  by  sickness  from  being 


1  In  Doctor  G-.  P.  Fisher's  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  361,  it 
is  remarked  that  among  the  Reformers  of  the  16th  Century  John 
Knox,  Luther,  and  Calvin,  all  took  this  ground.  Calvin  found 
"the  substance  of  the  Sabbath"  "not  in  one  day  but  in  the 
whole  course  of  our  lives."  The  notion  that  the  observance  of  one 
day  in  seven  was  enjoined  upon  Christians,  that  great  thinker 
reckoned  "  amoDg  the  dreams  of  false  prophets"  The  English 
Hooker  and  Andrewes,  on  the  other  hand,  maintained  the 
doctrine  of  a  rest-day  in  every  week  as  part  of  the  immutable  law. 


468  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

present.  But  this  was  before  the  clay's  work  began. 
The  early  Church  had  no  idea  that  any  Mosaic  Law 
of  rest  was  binding  on  the  Christian  conscience. 

5.  In  the  view  of  the  Post-Apostolic  Church,  as 
soon  as  we  can  find  evidence  of  it,  the  dead  were 
held  to  have  passed  into  an  intermediate  state  and 
place,  which  was  neither  heaven  nor  hell  in  the  stricter 
use  of  the  words,  there  to  wait  till  in  the  resurrec- 
tion they  resume  a  bodily  existence.  Then  only,  in 
the  great  Judgment,  would  the  rewards  of  joy  or 
pain  be  perfected.  And  in  the  meantime  it  was 
felt  that  the  Church  on  earth  had  a  right  to  ask 
God's  blessing  on  any  who  had  departed  in  the  faith 
and  in  peace.  Tertullian  is  the  first  writer  who 
mentions  such  a  habit,  but  he  mentions  it  as  a  thing 
understood  and  general.  There  is  no  trace  of  prayer 
for  the  deliverance  of  Christian  souls  from  pain  in 
this  period.  Rather,  the  prayers  are  of  those  who 
believe  that  God  will  bless  their  dead,  whether  they 
pray,  or  no,  but  wish  greatly  that  the  blessings  which 
God's  love  is  sure  to  send,  should  be  allowed  to  be 
in  part  an  answer  to  their  prayers,  and  so  a  gift  of 
human  love  as  well. 

6.  It  ought  to  be  noted,  finally,  that  there  was 
much  uncertainty  among  the  Churches  throughout 
this  period,  as  to  the  precise  boundaries  of  the  Canon 
of  Holy  Scripture.  In  the  case  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment the  difficulty  came  mostly  from  the  inclusion 
of  some  apocryphal  writings  in  the  LXX.  version. 
Origen,  as  we  have  seen,  was  deceived  into  contend- 
ing for  these  uncanonical  writings  as  part  of  the 
"  Bible  of  the  Church."     There  was  some  hesitation, 


Canon  of  Scripture  not  Settled  Early.        469 

on  the  other  hand,  about  admitting  Esther  and 
Lamentations.  It  was  only  in  the  time  of  St.  Jerome 
that  the  Old  Testament  Canon  was  settled  in  its 
present  form,  and  even  so  the  great  influence  of  St. 
Augustine  so  far  re-opened  the  question  as  to  secure 
for  some  apocryphal  books  a  recognition  as 
"  Deutero-Canonical "  from  the  Latin-speaking 
Churches.  Hence  the  official  Bible  of  the  Roman 
Communion  is  somewhat  different  in  its  contents 
from  that  of  the  English-speaking  and  Eastern 
Churches. 

In  the  case  of  the  New  Testament,  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas,  that  of  Clement  of  Rome,  and  the  Shep- 
herd of  Hernias  were  quoted  by  some  early  writers  as 
Holy  Scripture,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  St. 
James,  2,  3  St.  John,  2  St.  Peter,  and  the  Revelation, 
were  for  a  long  time  suspected  here  and  there  or 
even  disowned.  It  was  not  till  the  end  of  the  fourth 
century  that  the  Canon  was  fairly  established  in  its 
present  shape.  It  was  a  matter  of  historical  testimony 
whether  certain  works  had  been  divinely  accredited, 
or  no.  Testimony  was  slow  in  going  from  point  to 
point.  The  slowness  of  the  settlement  shows  that 
the  Churches  were  not  convinced  easily.  The  final 
agreement  shows  that  they  ivere  convinced  at  last. 

IV.  Worship.  The  subject  divides  itself  into 
two  parts, — the  weekly  service  of  the  Christian 
Eucharist,  and  the  forms  of  devotion  set  out  for 
such  as  could  meet  together  in  the  Church's  name 
for  daily  worship. 

1.  We  will  take  the  Daily  Services  first,  because 
we  know  so  very  little  about  them.     It  would  seem 


470  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

that  the  third,  sixth,  and  ninth  hours,  corresponding 
fairly  to  our  nine,  twelve,  and  three,  were  marked 
from  very  early  times  as  hours  of  public  prayer  com- 
mended to  such  persons  as  had  devotion  and  leisure. 
St.  Cyprian  speaks  {On  the  Lord's  Prayer,  near  end) 
of  the  morning  and  evening  hours  being  added  on 
the  ground  that  prayer  ought  to  begin  and  end  the 
day,  and  the  Church  cannot  have  gone  on  for  two 
centuries  without  enjoining  private  prayers  every 
morning  and  night  on  all  its  members,  so  that  the 
reference  must  be  to  an  enlargement  of  the  number 
of  public  services,  to  be  recited  by  the  Church  in  its 
corporate  capacity,  from  three  to  five. 

There  is  reason  for  believing  that  the  services  said 
at  these  hours  consisted  of  the  recital  of  groups  of 
Psalms,  followed  in  each  service  by  the  Lord's 
Prayer.  As  an  example  of  the  slowness  of  liturgical 
growth  beyond  these  simple  beginnings,  it  may  be 
said  that  in  the  Roman  Church,  which  doubtless  set 
the  fashion  for  many  others,  it  was  only  in  590,  when 
St.  Gregory  the  Great  became  bishop,  that  the  read- 
ing of  lessons  from  other  parts  of  Holy  Scripture 
was  added  to  the  psalmody  of  the  daily  offices.  It 
would  seem  also  to  have  been  long  before  the  ele- 
ment of  prayer  passed  beyond  the  use  of  the  one 
divine  model. 

2.  But  the  daily  offices  were  but  the  very  hem  of 
the  Church's  "garment  of  praise."  The  best  robe 
itself,  the  glorious  vesture  of  the  Body  Mystical,  was 
the  Service  of  the  Eucharist.  That  service  came  to 
be  called  preeminently  "the  Divine  Liturgy,"  "lit- 
urgy" being  a  Greek  word  for  "a  public  service," 


Early  Christian  Liturgies.  471 

"  a  service  rendered  to  the  community."  Such 
services  in  heathen  states  had  been  so  mixed  up  with 
religious  forms,  that  a  religious  and  indeed  sacrificial 
idea  had  begun  to  attach  to  the  word  before  the 
Coming  of  our  Lord.  The  study  of  "Liturgies" 
covers  all  forms  of  Christian  worship,  but  in  careful 
use  "Liturgy"  is  reserved  for  "a  Communion  Serv- 
ice "  exclusively.     We  shall  so  use  it  here. 

Now  the  earliest  account  of  a  Christian  Liturgy, 
which  is  in  any  way  full,  is  found  in  the  Catechetical 
Lectures  of  St.  Cyril,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  delivered 
in  348,  when  he  was  a  presbyter  of  that  city.  How 
then  can  we  pretend  to  know  what  were  the  ele- 
ments of  a  Liturgy  in  the  Post-Apostolic  Age  ?  The 
answer  is  found  in  a  very  remarkable  fact.  Students 
of  Ancient  Liturgies  find  that  they  fall  into  five 
groups  or  families,  the  Syrian,  representing  the 
Churches  of  Jerusalem  and  Antioch,  and  a  large 
region  naturally  following  their  lead,  the  Egyptian, 
representing  Alexandria  and  its  dependencies,  the 
Persian,  the  Hispano-Gallican,  and  the  Roman,  to 
which  is  sometimes  added  the  Byzantine,  the  use  of 
the  Church  of  Constantinople,  which  is  an  outgrowth 
from  the  Syrian.  Now  to  call  the  very  earliest  forms 
of  any  of  these  families  by  such  names  as  Liturgy  of 
St.  James,  Liturgy  of  St.  Mark,  Liturgy  of  St. 
Peter,  would  be  utterly  unhistorical  and  misleading, 
unless  it  were  done  simply  for  convenience  of  refer- 
ence, with  full  understanding  that  no  one  supposes 
that  St.  James  or  St.  Mark  ever  heard  such  a  form 
as  now  bears  his  name ;  but  our  remarkable  fact  is 
this,  and  a  very  remarkable  one  it  is.     These  diverse 


472  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Liturgies,  of  different  families,  and  representing 
widely  separated  lands,  do  after  all  agree  so  extraor- 
dinarily in  a  number  of  points  as  to  prove  conclu- 
sively that  at  some  point  in  the  Church's  history  there 
arose  a  tradition  of  certain  principles  as  to  what  a 
Eucharistic  Service  should  be,  which  tradition  abso- 
lutely dominated  the  Church  throughout  its  length 
and  breadth. 

Again,  what  are  called  "living  Liturgies,"  Litur- 
gies that  are  in  actual  use  for  worship,  are,  of  course, 
liable  to  much  revision,  but  we  have  one  check  on 
our  liturgical  history.  The  fact  that  the  Persian 
Church  fell  almost  unanimously  into  the  Nestorian 
heresy  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  and  the 
Egyptian  Church  nearly  as  entirely  into  the  Euty- 
chian  heresy  a  little  later,  has  done  much  to  help  us 
to  distinguish  between  what  was  in  their  Liturgies 
before  that  separation,  and  what  either  of  them  has 
added  since.  We  may  sa}^  then,  with  a  good  deal 
of  confidence,  that  wherever  a  Catholic  Christian 
might  have  gone  to  Church  on  a  Sunday  in  the  year 
400,  he  would  have  found  these  elements  in  the 
Liturgy  there  used : 

(a)  A  preparatory  service,  in  which  reading  of 
sundry  Scriptures  would  have  place, — perhaps  a 
Prophecy,  and  certainly  an  Epistle  and  a  Gospel, — 
and  the  sermon  would  be  preached,  after  which  all 
unbaptized  persons,  and  all  persons  who  were  sus- 
pended from  Communion,  would  be  compelled  to  re- 
tire.1 

'From  this  "dismissal,"  in  Latin,  3fissa,  of  the  Catechumens, 
the  preceding  service  came  to  be  called  3Iissa  Catechumenorum,  and 


Contents  of  an  Ancient  Liturgy.  473 

(b)     The  service  proper,  containing  : 

(1)  The  Kiss  of  Peace,  given  by  men  to  men  and 
by  women  to  women,  the  two  sexes  being  always 
separated  in  Church. 

(2)  The  offering  of  bread  and  wine  to  the  offi- 
ciating clergy,  out  of  which  the  portions  to  be  con- 
secrated would  be  taken,  and  the  rest  set  aside  for 
the  support  of  the  clerical  staff. 

(3)  The  words,  said  as  verse  and  response,  — 
V.     "  Lift  up  your  hearts." 

R.     "  We  lift  them  up  unto  the  Lord." 

V.     "  Let  us  give  thanks  unto  our  Lord  God." 

R.     "  It  is  meet  and  right." 

(4)  A  Preface  of  exalted  praise  and  thanksgiv- 
ing, often  running  to  considerable  length,  and 
though  differing  much  in  different  Liturgies,  always 
passing  into 

(5)  The  SanctuB,  or  Triumphal  Hymn, — l 

"  Holy,  Holy,  Holy,  Lord  of  hosts, 
Heaven  and  earth  are  full  of  Thy  (/lory.11 

(6)  A  long  prayer,  commemorating  the  redemp- 
tive work  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  sometimes  be- 
ginning even  from  the  Creation,  passing  through 

the  rest  of  the  service  3Iissa  Fidelium,  and  hence  comes  the  very 
innocent  word  "  Mass."  There  is  not  a  particle  of  corrupt  doc- 
trine or  practice  attaching  to  the  original  idea  of  the  Mass  of  the 
Catechumens,  or  the  Mass  of  the  Faithful. 

1  Sometimes  called  the  Ter-Sanctus  from  its  twice  repeated 
"Holy,"  but  the  name  Trisagion  belongs  properly  to  another 
liturgical  form  very  dear  to  Oriental  Christians,  "Holy  God,  Holy 
and  Mighty,  Holy  Immortal,  have  mercy  upon  us."  The  Sanctus 
is  formed  from  the  cry  of  the  Seraphim  (Is.  vi.  3),  with  the  ad- 
dition of  "Heaven  and,"  and  (in  nearly  all  Liturgies)  the  change 
from  '  His  glory  "  to  "Thy  glory."  Some  form  suggested  by  St. 
Matt.  xxi.  9,  is  generally  added. 


474  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

(7)  A  solemn  Oblation  of  the  bread  and  wine  as 
a  Christian  Sacrifice,  into 

(8)  An  Invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  con- 
secrate the  Elements  as  a  Sacrament,  of  which  we 
will  give  here  a  specimen  drawn  from  the  (So-called), 
Liturgy  of  St.  James,  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
Antioch,  in  its  Greek  version,  which  is  probably  one 
of  the  oldest  forms  that  have  come  down  to  us : 

"Send  down,  O  Lord,  Thy  Holy  Spirit  upon  us 
and  upon  these  Holy  Gifts  that  lie  before  Thee,  that 
visiting  them  with  His  holy  and  good  and  glorious 
Presence,  He  may  hallow  them,  and  make  this  bread 
the  Holy  Body  of  Christ,  and  this  cup  the  Precious 
Blood  of  Christ,  that  they  may  avail  to  all  who  par- 
take of  them  for  remission  of  sins  and  for  everlasting 
life,  for  hallowing  of  souls  and  bodies,  for  bringing 
forth  the  fruit  of  good  works,  for  confirming  of  Thy 
Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church,  which  Thou 
didst  found  upon  the  rock  of  the  Faith,  that  the 
gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail  against  it,  delivering 
it  from  all  heresy,  and  offences  of  them  that  do  in- 
iquity, preserving  it  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world." 

(9)  A  long  Prayer  of  Intercession,  for  the  Living, 
and  for  the  Faithful  Departed. 

(10)  The  Fraction  and  Commixture, — presently 
to  be  explained. 

(11)  The  Lord's  Prayer. 

(12)  The  Communion. 

Very  likely  our  Christian  traveller  might  find 
these  elements  of  service  coming  in  very  different 
order  in  different  countries.  We  have  given  the 
order  of  Palestine   and  Syria.     At   Alexandria  he 


Liturgies  Point  to   Common  Model.  475 

might  hear  the  Great  Intercession  (9),  intruded  very 
interruptingly  into  the  Preface  (4)  to  the  Sanctus. 
In  Persia  he  might  have  it  inserted  between  the 
Oblation  (7)  and  the  Invocation  (8).  In  France  or 
Spain  he  would  probably  have  heard  it  where  the 
English  and  American  Prayer  Books  put  their 
Prayer  for  the  Church  Militant  now,  immediately 
after  the  first  offering  of  the  bread  and  wine,  and  all 
this  before  the  Kiss  of  Peace.  In  Italy  again  he 
might  have  found  the  Intercession  divided, — it  is  so 
in  the  Roman  Service  as  far  back  as  we  can  trace  it, 
with  the  Prayer  for  the  Living  coming  before  the 
Commemoration  of  our  Lord's  Redemptive  Acts  (6), 
and  the  Prayer  for  the  Dead  after  the  Oblation  (7). 
Such  differences,  and  large  differences  in  the  phrase- 
ology of  these  prayers  and  thanksgivings,  which  yet 
have  a  common  plan,  only  bring  out  in  stronger  re- 
lief the  fact  that  some  power  had  impressed  deeply 
upon  the  Church's  mind  that  certain  things  must  be 
done  everywhere  at  every  celebration  of  the  Eu- 
charist. If  the  Christians  of  Persia  and  Egypt  and 
Spain  had  set  out  simultaneously  to  produce  written 
forms  for  the  Eucharistic  Service,  they  would  never 
have  agreed  in  the  choice  of  materials  and  in  the 
general  framework  in  any  such  way,  unless  they  had 
all  had  those  particular  materials  put  before  them, 
that  particular  framework  made  familiar  to  them,  by 
an  authority  so  commanding  that  they  could  not  but 
follow  it. 

But  then,  of  course,  different  Churches  may  not 
have  reduced  their  Liturgies  to  writing  simulta- 
neously.    No !  but  let  us  consider  what  probably  did 


476  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

happen.  We  may  fairly  assume  that  the  Church 
began  with  almost  entirely  extemporaneous  devo- 
tions in  its  Eucharistic  worship,  assisted  partly  by  a 
reverent  memory  of  what  our  Lord  Himself  had 
done  and  said,  when  He  celebrated  that  first  Eu- 
charist of  all  in  the  upper  room  on  the  night  before 
His  death,  and  partly  by  supernatural  gifts  of  utter- 
ance, such  as  marked  a  man  as  a  prophet.  We  may 
well  believe  that  for  a  long  time  the  Church  had 
men  of  inspired  utterance  to  consecrate  her  Euchar- 
ists, and  that  one  of  the  signs  of  the  work  of  the 
One  Spirit  guiding  them  was  a  large  unanimity  of 
plan,  with  a  rich  freedom  and  diversity  of  execution. 
Then  would  come  a  time  when  the  Church  was  not 
so  rich  in  prophets,  when  uninspired  men  could  but 
feebly  copy,  and  when  it  would  be  natural  to  write 
such  a  direction  for  the  Eucharistic  Service  as  that 
of  the  Teaching  of  the  Apostles.  "  But  permit  the 
prophets  to  give  thanks  as  much  as  they  will." 
That  time,  when  some  bishops  and  presbyters  still 
had  special  inspirations,  and  some  had  not,  would 
seem  to  have  continued  as  far  as  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  and  this  would  account  for  Justin 
Martyr's  phrase,  that  the  chief  man  among  the  breth- 
ren "  offers  prayers  and  thanksgivings  according  to 
his  ability  "  (p.  153). 

But  the  gift  of  prophecy  was  for  a  season  The 
Church  found  that  it  was  failing  more  and  more.  It 
was  plainl}T  not  intended  of  God  for  an  abiding  pos- 
session. The  Church's  ears  were  still  full  of  noble 
and  godly  forms,  but  her  tongue  was  losing  the 
power  to  utter  more  such,  unless  by  an  effort  of 


The  Creed  not  Said  in  Early  Liturgies.      477 

memory.  That  would  naturally  be  the  time  when 
the  Church  would  do  the  great  work  of  turning 
familiar  devotional  language  into  written  tradition. 
The  failure  of  the  prophet  brings  the  composition  of 
the  written  Liturgy.  That  is  a  conjecture,  but  it 
is  one  of  which  we  may  be  fairly  sure.  In  that  case 
also  we  may  pretty  confidently  set  down  the  process 
of  change  from  unwritten  to  written  liturgical  forms 
as  complete  within  the  second  century,  and  it  would 
seem  to  the  present  writer  fair  to  suppose  that  the 
general  habit  that  belongs  to  all  the  ancient  Litur- 
gies alike  may  be  set  down  as  coming  from  really 
Apostolic  sources.  There  never  was  a  Christian 
Liturgy,  probably,  that  did  not  show  most  of  these 
common  markings. 

It  may  be  noted  that  the  saying  of  the  Creed  does 
not  appear  in  this  list  of  common  features.  It  is 
quite  true.  It  was  not  a  part  of  Christian  Eucha- 
ristic  worship  till  after  the  Arian  controversy  had 
made  men  so  much  keener  than  ever  before  to  make 
sure  that  men  claiming  Catholic  communion  could 
bear  Catholic  tests.  It  is  a  remarkable  instance  of 
a  new  feature  everywhere  added  to  the  old  structure, 
and  so  gaining  that  very  universality  which  has  been 
here  put  forward  as  an  evidence  of  originality.  It 
should  be  observed,  however,  that  this  great  excep- 
tion was  itself  the  outcome  of  a  great  historic  strug- 
gle. It  was  added  to  the  original  liturgic  framework 
by  a  force  so  tremendous  that  it  could  not  be  hid. 
It  may  be  taken  as  a  sign  that  the  general  argument 
is   sound.     Universal    agreement  in  liturgical  plan 


478  The  Post-Apostolic  Age. 

means  either  Apostolic  origin,  or  some  force  so  great 
that  it  could  not  but  be  heard  of  in  history. 

Concerning  three  points  in  the  foregoing  list  ques- 
tions have  been  raised  which  should  have  mention 
here.  In  the  Commemoration  of  Redemption  (6) 
some  scholars  have  held  that  our  Lord's  words, 
"  This  is  My  Body,'"  "  This  is  My  Blood"  were  not 
originally  rehearsed,  though  now  no  Liturgy  is  said 
without  them.  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  does  not  refer 
to  them  in  his  account  of  the  service,  and  in  the 
Persian  Liturgies  this  passage  is  crushed  into  the 
service  in  the  midst  of  a  long  thanksgiving,  in  a  most 
artificial  fashion,  which  cannot  represent  an  original 
use.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  pleaded  that  St.  C}Tril 
had  lectured  on  the  words  in  question  a  little  before 
in  considering  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist,  and 
therefore  passed  them  over  in  silence  here,  and  that 
the  Nestorian  Church  of  Persia  had  probably  had  a 
tradition  of  never  allowing  this  most  sacred  formula 
to  be  written  down,  and  hence  it  came  to  pass  both 
that  some  manuscripts  appear  without  it,  and  that 
it  was  inserted  into  ill-chosen  places  in  the  service 
in  later  days. 

It  ought  to  be  observed  in  any  endeavor  to  bal- 
ance the  probabilities  of  this  question,  that  when  our 
Lord  Himself  instituted  the  Eucharistic  Sacrament 
and  Sacrifice,  "  He  took  bread  and  blessed  it."  That 
was  His  Communion  Service,  and  His  Apostles  re- 
membered well  what  He  did  and  what  He  said. 
They  would  surely  endeavor  to  do  very  much  as  He 
did.  If  we  may  judge  from  the  universal  habit  of 
early  Liturgies,  He  made  a  long  prayer,  very  rich  in 


Lord's  Prayer  Called  a  Form  of  Consecration.  479 

the  elements  of  thankful  commemoration  and  high 
praise,  and  ended  with  an  act  of  Oblation  of  Himself 
and  an  Invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Then  the 
hallowed  bread  was  made  to  be  His  Body,  and  He 
said  so,  breaking  it  and  giving  it  to  His  disciples. 
Most  certainly  those  disciples  did  not  regard  those 
words,  "  This  is  My  Body,"  as  words  of  power  mak- 
ing the  bread  so  to  be,  but  as  His  declaration  of 
what  by  His  prayer  of  blessing  He  had  made  it 
to  be  before.  In  other  words  what  are  commonly 
called  the  "  Words  of  Institution  "  are  not  properly 
so  called,  for  it  was  not  in  saying  those  words,  but 
in  the  blessing  and  giving  thanks  which  had  pre- 
ceded, that  our  Lord  made  His  Sacrament  to  be. 

St.  Gregory  the  Great  (about  590)  got  it  into  his 
mind  that  the  Apostles  used  to  consecrate  the  Eu- 
charist by  saying  the  Lord's  Prayer.  That  has  been 
a  sore  puzzle  to  liturgical  scholars.  May  it  not  be 
that  he  had  heard  some  disquieting  testimony  that 
they  did  not  use  what  men  were  beginning  to  call 
the  "  Words  of  Institution,"  and  that  having  lost 
the  true  key  to  the  meaning  of  the  service,  the  noble 
thought  that  God's  supreme  Sacramental  Gift  must 
be  won  by  prayer  rather  than  by  formula,  he  fastened 
upon  the  Lord's  own  prayer  as  the  only  thing  which 
looked  like  a  formula,  such  as  his  somewhat  legal 
turn  of  mind  led  him  to  demand  as  a  basis  of  sacra- 
mental efficacy,  in  the  order  of  service  which  he  was 
assured  was  Apostolic  in  its  tradition? 

This  question,  however,  might  be  decided  either 
way  without  affecting  the  Table  of  Eucharistic 
Materials  just  given.     A  more  concerning  doubt  has 


480  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

been  raised  on  the  other  side,  whether  the  form  (8), 
the  Invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  was  really  a  uni- 
versal feature  of  Liturgies  descending  from  Apostolic 
days.  The  present  writer  believes  that  it  was.  It 
is  said  to  be  wanting  in  some  Liturgies  of  the 
Churches  of  Gaul  and  Spain, — Gallican  and  Mozar- 
abic  they  are  called, — but  while  some  copies  have 
such  a  form,  and  some  have  not,  we  have  the  testi- 
mony of  St.  Isidore  of  Seville  that  it  was  a  feature 
of  the  Spanish  service  in  his  day  (about  600),  which 
is  earlier  than  any  of  our  extant  copies.  Not  a  copy 
of  the  Italian  Liturgy  in  any  of  its  forms,  Roman, 
Ambrosian,  Gregorian,  has  preserved  such  a  thing, 
unless  it  be  in  some  meagre  trace  introduced  into  the 
Commemoration  of  Redemption,  but  again  we  have 
testimon}T  that  in  an  earlier  day  than  any  from 
which  we  have  service-books  remaining,  the  African 
Church,  which  had  the  same  kind  of  service  as  the 
Italian,  did  use  this  Invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  regard  the  Consecration  of  the  Eucharistic 
Elements  as  depending  on  it.  It  seems  as  if  it  could 
be  safely  set  down  that  in  the  year  400,  or  in  the 
Post-Apostolic  Age,  such  a  feature  as  is  here  marked 
(8)  was  really  a  part  of  every  Eucharistic  form. 

The  ceremonies  of  Fraction  and  Commixtion, 
numbered  (10),  were  a  symbolic  breaking  of  bread 
to  signify  that  our  Lord's  Body  was  broken  for  our 
sakes,  and  the  putting  of  a  portion  of  this  broken 
bread  into  the  chalice,  to  symbolize,  as  by  the  re- 
union of  the  Body  and  the  Blood,  the  re-union  of 
our  Lord's  Soul  and  Body  in  the  Resurrection. 
There  was  a  time,  apparently,  when  these  cererao- 


Are  Forms  in  the  Didache  Liturgical?       481 

nies  were  universal,  but  it  has  been  gravely  questioned 
whether  they  were  primitive.  For  instance,  St. 
Chrysostom  mentions  that  in  his  day  (about  400) 
the  Syrian  Rite  did  include  a  breaking  of  the  bread, 
before  the  curtains  of  the  sanctuary  were  drawn 
back  for  the  Communion  of  the  people,  and  he  uses 
the  word  appropriated  to  this  "  ritual  fraction,"  and 
not  the  word  commonly  employed  for  the  breaking 
into  many  pieces  for  distribution.  But  St.  Cyril  of 
Jerusalem  explaining  the  Liturgy  forty  years  earlier 
does  not  mention  any  such  thing.  It  does  not  follow 
certainly,  however,  that  the  custom  did  not  then 
exist. 

The  subject  is  of  some  interest  as  possibly  con- 
necting itself  with  the  forms  of  prayer  which  we 
quoted  from  the  Teaching  on  pp.  27,  28.  Those  two 
prayers  have  been  stated  by  eminent  scholars,  and 
even  by  some  who  did  not  despise  liturgical  studies, 
to  be  "  very  early  forms  for  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist."  It  ought  to  have  been  quite  inconceiv- 
able that  they  were  meant  to  stand  as  a  Liturgy,  a 
sufficient  form  for  the  consecration  of  the  elements. 
They  have  nothing  in  common  with  the  universal 
liturgical  tradition  of  the  Church,  no  matter  how 
simply  one  might  imagine  it  to  be  treated.  They 
would  perfectly  well  accompany  such  a  frame- 
work as  we  have  described.  They  could  not  be 
imagined  to  be  acceptable  as  a  substitute  for  it,  nor 
yet  as  a  root  out  of  which  the  kind  of  Liturgies  that 
are  now  known  to  us  could  grow.  For  instance,  the 
great  Thanksgiving  of  the  Church's  liturgic  habit  is 
a  Thanksgiving  for  the  whole  work  of  Redemption. 
EE 


482  The  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

Here  we  have  a  thanksgiving  for  this  Eucharistic 
Gift,  "  the  holy  Vine  of  David/'  made  known  through 
our  Lord.  Again,  the  order  of  the  prayers,  putting 
the  cup  first,  and  the  express  mention  of  the  bread 
as  already  "  broken  bread  "  are  not  to  be  overlooked. 
Both  these  facts  hint,  at  least,  that  these  are  thanks- 
givings after  the  consecration  rather  than  prayers  of 
consecration. 

If  now  we  might  assume  that  the  ceremony  of  the 
symbolic  fraction  was  in  use  in  the  region  where  the 
directions  were  written,  all  would  become  clear. 
These  would  appear  as  prayers  for  the  congregation 
to  say,  perhaps  aloud  as  part  of  the  Liturgy  itself, 
perhaps  privately,  as  many  devout  persons  use  man- 
uals of  devotion  in  the  intervals  of  liturgical  serv- 
ices now,  the  first  just  after  the  consecration  of  the 
Bread  and  the  Cup,  when  the  Cup  is  taken  up  first 
for  an  act  of  thanksgiving  because  last  mentioned 
by  the  officiant  at  the  altar,  the  second  after  the 
ritual  fraction  has  added  a  most  interesting  symbol- 
ism to  the  hallowed  Bread,  which  is  at  once  made  a 
subject  for  devout  contemplation.  If  it  be  held  that 
the  ritual  fraction  was  not  known  so  early  as  the 
end  of  the  first  century,  then  this  prayer  over  the 
broken  bread  must  refer  to  the  breaking  for  distri- 
bution as  having  already  taken  place,  but  the  word 
for  "  broken  "  is  just  that  which  in  later  times  dis- 
tinguished the  ritual  fraction  from  the  fraction  for 
communion. 

A  large  amount  of  information  in  regard  to  the 
worship  and  devotional  usages  of  this  period,  may 
be   found  in  the  Rev.  F.  E.   Warren's  Liturgy  and 


The   Church  is    Christ's  After  All.  483 

Ritual   of   the   Ante   Nicene    Church   (pp.  319),  pub- 
lished by  the  S.  P.  C.  K. 

Here  we  must  close  our  study  of  the  Post-Apos- 
tolic Age.  With  much  left  out  which  it  would  have 
been  a  pleasure  to  put  in,  it  has  been  the  writer's 
endeavor  to  be  fair,  and  while  setting  forth  the 
glories  of  the  Divine  Kingdom,  to  conceal  nothing 
of  its  faults  and  failures.  Yet  whatever  the  faults, 
the  failures,  the  mistakes  of  the  Church  of  Christ 
may  be,  it  is  always  His  Mystical  Body  here  on 
earth,  deeply  one  with  the  Saviour  Himself,  one  with 
the  great  Church  of  the  heavenly  Paradise,  and  in- 
stinct with  the  heavenly  Life  which  is  the  Leaven 
that  changes  the  character  of  the  world.  The  more 
the  believer  studies  the  history  of  that  wonderful 
Church,  even  in  its  worst  days,  the  more  reason  he 
will  have  to  be  thankful  for  the  coming  into  this 
world's  low  life  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  our  Life. 


INDEX. 


Abilius,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  87. 

Abdon,  Martyr,  364. 

Accusation,  of  Christians  dis- 
couraged, 130  sq. 

Acts  i.  13—64. 

i.  21,  22—69. 

iii.  13,  26—29. 

iv.  27,  30—29. 

iv.  v.— 107. 

vi.— 205. 

xiii.  52 ;  xiv.  1— 225n. 

xiv.  6— 225n. 

xv.  i. — 178. 

xv.  13—65ii. 

xv.  20,  29-170. 

xx.  17,  28—80. 

xxi.  8—120. 

iElia,  Capitolina,  built  by  Ha- 
drian, 179,  211,  350. 

Africa,  in  Tertulliau's  Time,  281, 
282. 

Agape,  a  love  feast,  270. 

Agatha,  Martyr,  363. 

Age  of  the  Councils,  9. 

Agrippinus,  Bishop  of  Carthage, 
406. 

Albigenses,  436. 

Alee,  a  Roman  lady,  137. 

Alcibiades,  the  Syrian,  188. 

his  Book  of  Elchesai,  188. 

his  book,  Essene  Ebionitic, 

188. 

gave  a  new  way  of  salva- 
tion, 188. 

Alexander,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem, 
17,  352,  353,  355,  363. 

Alexander,  the  Great,  317. 

Alexandria,  election  of  Bishop  at, 
72. 

list   of  Bishops  at,  86,   87, 

356. 


Alexandria,  its  place  in  Church 

history,  317  sq. 
its  Philosophy   and   Theol- 
ogy, 319. 

the  School  at,  354,  358. 

plague-stricken,  394. 

Almsgiving,  398,  399. 
Altar,  the  Christian,  27,  464. 
Ambrose,  a  convert,  354,  363. 
Amen,  its  early  use,  151,  153. 
Aminia,  a  prophetess,  120. 
Ammouius,  Saccas,  349. 
Anag  murdered  Chosroes,  434. 
Andrews,  Bishop,  295n. 
Audronicus  and  Junias,  65. 
Angels,  the  worship  of,  146. 

of  Churches,  66. 

Anicetus,  bishop  of  Rome,   212, 

213,  214. 
called    upon    by    Polycarp, 

212,  213n.,  214. 
his    view    of    the    Paschal 

question,  212  sq. 
Annianus,  bishop  of  Alexandria, 

86. 
Antioch,  bishops  at,  87. 
Antiphonal  singing,  54n. 
Antoninus     Pius,    emperor,  131, 

144,  145,  146n.,  156. 
Antony,  the  hermit,  437. 
the  founder  of  monasticism, 

437  sq. 
his  experiences  and  resolve, 

437,  438,  439. 

miracles,  ascribed  to,  438. 

his  career  and  death,  437- 

40. 
Apollouius,  Roman   Senator  and 

martyr,  463. 
Apologetics,  their  ages,  119,  120, 

160,  173,  174. 


485 


486 


Index. 


Apologetics,  belong  to  a  period  of 
transition,  120,  160. 

Apostle,  change  in  the  idea,  63. 

Apostles,  named  uniformly  in 
three  groups,  64,  65. 

were  numerous  in  Apostolic 

times,  65,  90. 

their  relation  to  later  Bish- 
ops, 65,  66,  90. 

Apostolic  age,  and  its  leaders, 
1  sq. 

Church,    its    position    and 

difficulties,  1  sq.,  9,  10. 

an  immaturity,  10,  11. 

governed  by  Apostles,  61  sq. 

governed  later  by  Bishops, 

61  sq. 

Fathers,  The,  18  sq. 

as  a  group,  19. 

their  writings,  18  sq. 

Succession,  327. 

Aquilius,  160. 

Arianism,  9,  384n. 

Aristides,  his  Apology,  120,  121. 

account  of  the  Apology,  122. 

its  recovery,  122,  123. 

account    of    its    contents, 

125  sq. 

Armenia,  its  apostle,  434. 

its  Christianity,  434,  435. 

Arnobius,  rhetorician,  440. 

Christian  writer,  441. 

Artaxius,  martyr,  243. 
Artemon  and  his  heresy,  431. 
Asceticism,  its  value,  437,  438. 
Asiarch,  the  chief  priest,  134. 
Aspasius,  presbyter,  244. 
Astarte,  the  worship  of,  281. 
Athanasius,  of  Alexandria,  346, 

440. 
Athenagoras,  and  his  works,  160, 

161,  324. 
Atheuodorus,  brother  of  Gregory, 

426,  427. 
Attalus,  a  martyr,  163,  169. 
Augustine,    of   Hippo,    50,   240, 

241,  334,  346,  365,  412. 

as  Manichaean,  436. 

Aurelian  Emperor,  432. 
Aurelius,  his  reign,  157n. 


Authority  for  deciding  in    con- 
troversy or  doubt,  57,  261,  262. 
residing  in  the  Church,  262. 

Babylas  of  Antioch,  martyr,  363. 

Bacchius,  grandfather  of  Justin 
Martyr,  142. 

Baptism,  early  teaching  upon, 
25,  149,  269,  398,  399,  403  sq., 
454  sq. 

and  regeneration,   269,  454, 

455. 

on    its    form    and    matter, 

280n.,  295,  296,  297,  403  sq., 
405n. 

in  cases  of  necessity,  295. 

forgiveness    of     sin    after, 

309  sq. 

of  infants,  393. 

clinic,  393. 

controversy  over  its  repeti- 
tion, 403  sq. 

Tertullian's    views      upon, 

404  sq. 

conditional  rebaptism,  405. 

in  the  Triune  Name,  405. 

heretical,  a  question,  410. 

schismatic,  a  question,  410. 

as  "the  Seal,"  455. 

ceremonies  attending  it,  456, 

457. 

Baptists,  "Six  principle  bap- 
tists "  459 

Bar  Cochba,  the  Jew,  113,  179. 

Barlaam  and  Josaphat,  the  story 
of,  122,  123,  124. 

its  connection  with  Aris- 
tides' Apology,  122  sq. 

Barnabas,  companion  of  St.  Paul, 
19,  20,  21. 

his  Anti-Jewish  feeling,  21. 

called  an  apostle,  65. 

Barnabas,  the  Letter  of,  19  sq. 

its    history    and    character 

discussed,  19,  29,  21. 

its  allegorisni,  23. 

its  dates  according  to  Light- 
foot,  25. 

Basil  of  Csesarea,  346,  410. 

Basilides,  heretic,  196. 


Index. 


487 


Basilides,  bishop  of  Leon,  400. 
Benson   on     the     Carthaginians, 

281  ■ 
on  Cyprian,  368,  368n.,  387,  \ 

391u. 
Berington,    and   Kirk,    Faith    of 

Catholics,  265. 
Biblias,  martyr,  169. 
Bishop,  the  force  of  the  word,  38, 

62  sq. 
the  authority  and  office  con- 
sidered, 62,  95  sq.,  387. 
testimony    of  the    Luther- 
ans for,  67n. 

as  not  apostolic,  69,  95  sq. 

as  a  development,  73  sq. 

as  viewed    by   Dr.    Hatch, 

74  sq.,  95. 
in  choir  with  his  presbyters, 

101. 
one  alone  in  each  see,  352, 

387,  402. 

a  Coadjutor,  352. 

his  jurisdiction,  369,  369n., 

370,  387,  388,  402. 
best    in     a    small    diocese, 

402n. 
elected  by  his  diocese,  402, 

450. 
election  of,  considered,  450, 

451. 
Blandina,  martyr,  168. 
Bodies,  natural  and  spiritual,  203, 

203u.,  204. 
Bogomiles,  436. 

British,  early  Christianity,  287n. 
Bunyan's,  Pilgrims  Progress,  40. 
Burrhus,    Ignatius'    deacon  and 

amanuensis,  47. 

Csecilia  St.,  Martyr,  313n. 
Csecilianus,     of    Carthage,    367, 

446n. 
Caecilius,  bishop,  392. 
Caius,  or  Gaius  at  Corinth,  35. 
Callistus,  bishop  of  Rome,  257, 

304,  305,  314. 
toward  Monarchianism, 

307  sq. 
on  post-baptismal  sin, 309  sq. 


Callistus,  the  Catacomb  of,  313n. 

his  death,  314. 

Calvin,    on  ecclesiastical   polity, 

46n.,  467n. 

on  the  sacraments,  270. 

on  the  Sabbath,  467n. 

Canon,  of  Scripture,  468,  469. 
Capitolina,  Martyr,  429. 
Caracalla,     Emperor,    350,    360, 

361. 
Carpophorus,  311. 
Carpus  of  Thyatira,  Martyr,  363. 
Carthage,  in  the  visions,  245. 
description    of  its  city  life, 

281,  282. 
Cassian  of  Imola,  364- 
Catechetical   School   in   Alexan- 
dria, 322  sq. 
Cathari,  Novatians  or  Puritans, 

413. 
Catharists,  436. 

Catholic,  force  of  the  word,  56n. 
Celtic  missionaries  in    England, 

223. 
Cerdon,    Bishop    of  Alexandria, 

87. 
Charlemagne  received   Cyprian's 

remains,  420. 
Charles,  the  Bald   built  church 

and  monastery,  420. 
Chiliasm,    Millenarianism,    423, 

424. 
Choir,  Ignatius  illustration  from 

it,  53,  54. 

its  use  in  early  days,  53,  54. 

Chosroes,  of  Armenia,  424. 
Chrism,   at    baptism,     456,    457, 

458,  459. 
Christ,  more  than  a  mere  leader, 

1. 
made  a  selection  of  fit  lead- 
ers, 2. 
His  indwelling  life   in   the 

church,  11,  262. 

His  revealing,  197,  262. 

His  Gospel  essentials, 262  sq. 

His  age  at  death,  269. 

date  of  His  birth,  306n. 

first     called      "God-Man," 

346,  347. 


488 


Index. 


Christ,  His  Godhead,  346,  347. 

was  careful  in  church  organ- 
ization, 64,  65. 

the  mind  of  the  Father,  99, 

100. 

His    miracles    accepted   by 

the  apologists,  148. 

the  exact  day  of  His  death, 

216,  217. 

virgin    born,  252,  254,  262, 

268n. 

Christian,  picture  of  life  by  the 
Apologist,  126,  127,  128. 

has  slight  relief  under  Ha- 
drian, 130. 

Martyrdom,   134,   135,   141, 

163  sq. 

misrepresentation   by   their 

enemies,  141,  145  sq. 

feeling  toward  gods,  146. 

facts    and    principles   were 

foretold,  148  sq. 

religion     as    a    fashionable 

thing,  4,  9. 

population  computed,  10n., 

116. 

early    Christian    writings, 

19  sq.,  115,  116. 

popularly  disliked,  and  the 

reasons  for  it,  107  sq.,  145  sq. 

interference  with  marriage, 

107. 

and   with   family  property, 

107,  108. 

could  not  live  as  the  heath- 
en, 108. 

accused  of  crimes,  109,  147, 

154,  166. 

obedience  to  a  law  outside 

the  Roman,  110,  147,  157n. 

details  of  their  persecutions, 

114  sq.,  163  sq.,  214. 

earlv    worship,    115,    116, 

146n.,  151,  152. 

Apostasies    in    persecution, 

371  sq. 

Science  is  Gnostic,  198. 

day   of    rest   and    worship, 

465. 
the  Lord's  Day,  465,  468. 


Christiau,  Holy  Scriptures,  468, 
469. 

Apocrypha,  469. 

Christianity   lifted    the    idea   of 

worship,  147n. 

met  a  clamant  need,  175  sq. 

made    a   religio   licita,    366, 

442. 

its  organization,  447  sq. 

its  Faith,  451  sq. 

its  Theology,  453  sq. 

its  worship,  469  sq. 

affected    by    contemporary 

civilization,  vii. 

Ckristus  and  Chrestus,  145,  146. 

Church,  representing  two  princi- 
ples, 178,  447  sq. 

her    troubles    over    Easter, 

210  sq. 

as  a  perpetual  witness,  261, 

262,  263,  264,  265. 

her  use  of  tradition,  262  sq. 

her  ancient  customs,  297  sq. 

her     restrictions    regarding 

bishops,  352,  353. 

had  one  bishop  to  a  see,  352, 

353. 

building,  362,  362n. 

on  a  Petri ue  base,  388,  389. 

must  have  its  bishops,  426, 

427. 

her      theories      criticised, 

447  sq. 

slow   to    disentangle   sacri- 
fice, 464. 
the  Mystical  Body  of  Christ, 

xi. 
received  capable  leaders,  1, 

2. 
its   work   in    the   Apostolic 

Age,  6,  42,  262  sq. 
question  between  the  older 

and  the  new,  6. 

its  task,  6,  7,  42. 

its  dangers,  7,   10,  55,  144, 

145,  208. 
in  persecution,  7,  55,  105  sq., 

130. 
in    prosperity    under    Con- 

stantine,  10,  119. 


Index. 


489 


Church,  evolutions  in  the  Amer- 
ican Church,  37n. 

its  feebleness,  42. 

its    spiritual    strength,    43, 

262,  263. 

its  unity  essential,  55,  56, 

212,  262,  263,  352,  353,  384  sq. 

how  was  it  originally  gov- 
erned, 61  sq.,  118,  447  sq. 

as  a  pronounced  democracy, 

78,  85. 

sufficiently  clear  in  Clem- 
ent's Epistles,  92  sq. 

and  Empire,  105  sq.,  141  sq. 

as  a  solid  organization,  119, 

447. 

as  under  Hadrian,  130. 

as   having   been   early   cor- 
rupted and  altered,  132. 
Church-Government,   theories  of 

considered,  61  sq. ,  85  sq. ,  447  sq. 
a  matter  of  importance  to 

Christ,  64,  65. 
the  Post-reformation  views, 

67  sq. 
its  nature  at  Corinth  in  St. 

Paul's  time,  65  sq. 
Claudius  Apolinarius,  Bishop  of 

Hierapolis,  161,  162,  215. 
his  authority  given  by  Euse- 

bius,  162. 
in  the  Paschal  controversy, 

215,  216. 
Clemens,  frequency  of  the  name, 

31. 
Clement,  of  Alexandria, 
had  probably  a  Roman  con- 
nection, 325  u. 

his  training,  326,  327. 

his  claim  to  orthodoxy,  327, 

328,  329. 

his  writings,  329  sq. 

his  Stromata,  320. 

faults  in  his  teaching,  332, 

333. 

of  Alexandria,    19,    42,  66, 

86,    189u.,    205,    325  sq.,  353, 
463. 

as  scholar  interpreter,  23u. 

Platonist,  326. 


190, 


194 


Clement  of  Rome,  his  character, 

39r  49,  96,  191. 
his  doubtful  testimony,  92, 

93,  94. 
of  Rome,  his  Epistles,  30  sq., 

92,  96  sq.,  191u. 

their  matter,  30  sq.,  98. 

their  authorship,  31  sq. 

their  occasion,  34  sq.,  98. 

their  quality,  37  sq.,  93,  94, 

95,  96. 
their  range   of   quotations, 

39. 

written  in  Latin,  40. 

his  date,  46,  97. 

second  Epistle,  59. 

Clementine  Recognitions,  190. 
the  plot  of  the  story, 

191. 
aim  of  their  teaching 

sq. 

tone  Anti-Pauline,  194,  195. 

Cleomenes,  Sabellian,  256.  311. 
Clerical  parties,  36,  37,  38. 
Coadjutor  Bishop,  352. 
Col.  i.  26—201. 
Commemoration    of   the  faithful 

dead,  33. 
Commodus,  his  reign,  157u.,  173, 

360,  463. 
Commune  A  six,  134. 
Communion  Service,  described  in 

detail,  472,  473. 
Community  of  goods,  107. 
its  extent  and  principle,  107, 

108. 
Confession   as   a   technical    term, 

16n. 
Confirmation  after  baptism,  456, 

457. 
Congregationalism,  447,  450. 
Conscience,  as  an  obstruction   to 

law,  llln. 
Constantiue,    his    motive   in    ac- 
cepting the  Church,  4,  59.  444. 
published  his  Edict  of  Toler- 
ation, 5,  14. 
made  it  profitable  to   be  a 

Christian,  10. 
his  character,  17,  384n. 


490 


Index. 


Constantine,  in  the  Paschal  con- 
troversy, 219. 

in    the    Novatian    schism, 

384n. 

his  vision,  445. 

triumph    over    Maxentius, 

444,  445,  446. 

his  imperial  policy,  449. 

Constantinople,  fifth  council  of, 

357. 
Constantius    Chlorus,    Emperor, 

442,  444. 
Controversy  always  changing  its 

ground,  73,  84,  308. 
on  different  topics,  208  sq., 

308. 

on  Paschal  observance,  208. 

on  Montanism,  208. 

on     God     and     the     Holy 

Trinity,  208. 

— —  on  Monarchianism,  307  sq. 
Convenire  ad  and  cum,  266. 
Corinth,  Clement's  Epistles  to  the 

Church  at,  31  sq. 
parties  at,  34  sq. 

1  Cor.  ii.  7—201. 

v.— 298. 

xiv.  32—227. 

xv.  7— 65n.  ;  xv.  44— 203n. 

2  Cor.  ii.— 298. 
xi.  13—65. 

Cornelius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  379, 
429. 

had  a  rival  Bishop,  380  sq. 

died,  399. 

his     posthumous    honors, 

420. 

Corrigenda,  xiii. 

Councils    on   the   Paschal   ques- 
tions, 218  sq. 

on  Everlasting  Punishment, 

357. 

intended  to  meet  difficulties, 

376,  377,  449. 
African  with  Cyprian,   378, 

379,  380,  400,  407.' 
frequent   at   Carth.nge,   392, 

400,  407,  449n. 

at  Antioch,  431. 

issuing  canons,  449. 


Neo- 


250, 


Councils,    numerous    before    the 

Nicene,  449,  450. 
Elvira,  Aries,  Ancyra, 

Csesarea,  and  Nicsea,  449. 
Creed,  the  Nicene,  451. 
Creeds,   their  purpose,  249, 

262,  290  sq.,  477. 
earliest  form  and  examples, 

451. 

modern   additions   to  the, 

viii. 

Crescens,  Cynic,  155. 

Cross,  signing  with,  in  baptism, 

457. 
Cup  mixed,  272,  273,  274. 
Curate,  its  meanings,  70. 
Cyprian,  his  active  charity,  393, 

394. 

appealed  to  from  Gaul,  401. 

opposed  Roman  aggressions, 

408  sq. 

opposed    the    rebaptisms, 

408,  412,  457. 

explanation    of    his   strong 

feeling,  412. 
his    death,   412,    414,    417, 

418,  419. 
his  banishment,    414,    416, 

417. 
lived  in   an  atmosphere  of 

divine  providence,  414,  415. 
his  character,   419-21,  423, 

431. 

posthumous  honors,  420. 

his  contemporaries  423  sq. 

on  baptism,  457. 

on  Christian  worship,  470. 

■  Bishop  of  Carthage,  366. 

his  origin  and  training,  366, 

367. 

on  Church  government,  63. 

on  the  Eucharist,  271. 

martyred,  365. 

converted    by    Csecilanus, 

367. 

his  writings,  369  sq. 

on  Virgins,  370. 

in  the  persecution,  371  sq. 

his     practical     difficulties, 

375  sq.,  431. 


Index. 


491 


Cyprian  supported  by  the  African 

councils,  378  sq.,  449n. 
on  the  Roman  schism,  379 

sq. 
writes  on  Unity,  385,    386, 

431. 
criticisms  upon  his  De  Uni- 

tate,  386. 

on  the  Pe trine  claims,  388. 

is  interpolated,  390o. 

on  schismatics,  391  sq. 

on  Eucharist,  392,  463. 

on  the  sacraments,  393. 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  471. 

Damas,  Bishop  of  Magnesia.  47. 
Dan.  vii.  9,  10—240. 

ix.  24,  27— 24u. 

Deaconesses,  two  under  torture, 

116. 
Dead,   in  an  intermediate  state, 

468. 

offerings  for  the,  297,  468. 

prayer  for,  297,  468,  475. 

their  condition,  396,  468. 

Death  better  than  life,  396,  397. 

its  intermediate  state,  468. 

Decius,  Emperor,  363,  422. 
great     persecutor     of     the 

Christians,  363,  371. 
Demetrian  bishop  of   Samosata, 

432. 
Demetrius,  Bishop,  324,  353. 
complain  about  Origen,  353, 

354,  355,  356. 
Demiurge,   Gnostic   notion,    199, 

250. 
Didache,  The,  25  sq. 

its  Jewish  tone,  29. 

its  date,  30. 

Dinocrates,   brother   of  St.   Per- 

petua,  240,  241. 
Diocese,  its   ancient  definitions, 

15n. 
Diocletian    Emperor,     360,    366, 

422,  442,  444. 

persecution,  440,  441,  442. 

cause  and  course  of  the  per- 
secution, 442sq. 
Diodore,  layman  of  Antioch,  54n. 


Diognetus,  letter  to,  60.  109,  161. 

Dion  Chrysostomus,  324. 

Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Alexandria, 
27n.,  357,  395u.,  422,  423,  424, 
429. 

opposed  the  Roman  aggres- 
sion, 408,  409. 

opposed  Sabellianism,  424. 

Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  425, 
432. 

African  Bishop,  410. 

Diotrephes,  35,  36. 

Ditheists,  308. 

Docetx,  a  Gnostic  sect,  203. 

Domitian,  the  Emperor,  31,  45. 

a  persecutor  of  the  Chris- 
tians, 31,  105,  114. 

his  motive  in  persecution, 

105. 

Domnus,  Bishop  of  Samosata, 
432. 

Donatists,  282,  446n. 

Dress,  Tertullian  on  women's, 
298. 

Easter,  the  time  for  celebrating 

it,  21,  223. 
controversy  over   the  time, 

209  sq. 
Ebionism,  177  sq.,  184,  189,  189n. 
Ebionite  line  of  thought,  178  sq. 
Ebionites    form    two    branches, 

181. 

Pharisaic,  181  sq. 

Essene  or  Gnostic,  184  sq. 

Ecstasy,  forbidden  to  a  prophet, 

230. 
used  by  the  Montanists,  229, 

230,  231. 
its    New    Testament    idea, 

230. 
Edersheim     upon     the    Essenes, 

184  sq. 

on  the  Easter  question,  217n. 

Edict  of  Milan,  5,  446. 
Egypt,  in  church  history,  317  sq. 
Elagabalus,  Emperor,  361. 
Elchesai,  Syriac  for  Hidden  Pow- 
er, 190. 
Eleutherus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  233. 


492 


Index. 


Eleutherus,   excluded  the  Mon- 

tanists,  235. 
Emperor,  his  worship,  134,  138. 
Eph.  iii.  9,  11—201. 
Epigonus,  Sabellian,  256. 
Episcopacy,  early  at  Borne,  33. 
its  theory  and  usage,  64  sq. 

opposition     changing     its 

ground,  73. 

the  non-Episcopalian  view, 

73  sq.,  447. 

as  a  development,  73,  450. 

as  not  diocesan,  447  sq.,  450, 

451. 

Episcopate  in  solidarity,  387. 

Episcopoi,  according  to  Dr.  Mc- 
Griffert,  81,  82. 

Essenes,  their  tenets  and  prac- 
tices. 184  sq. 

their  condition  and  num- 
bers, 185,  186,  187. 

their  treatment  of  the  Bible, 

186. 

their  theology,  186. 

their  use  of  the  Sacraments, 

186,  187. 

their  influence  upon  Chris- 
tianity, 187. 

Eucharist,  27,  98,  151,  154.  187, 
210,  213,  260,  270,  296,  342. 

its    consecration    a   priestlv 

function,  76,  91,  95,  96,  98, 
213,  270,  461,  462. 

every  Lord's  Day,  96,  296. 

as    related    to    the    Jewish 

system,  98,  209.  210. 

Eucharist,    its    Kiss    of    Peace, 

244n. 
a  sphere  of  spiritual  power, 

270. 

teachings  upon,  270  sq.,  296. 

received  fasting,  299,  300. 

by  water  alone,  392. 

as  a  Sacrifice,  459,  460,  461, 

462,  463. 

as  a  service,  467,  470  sq. 

Eucharistic  Service,  early,  27,  28, 

210,  470  sq. 

its  form,  151,  152. 

Euchratius,  bishop,  369. 


Eusebius,  the  historian,  13  sq., 
45,  49,  59,  71,  87n.,  221,  232, 
233,  324,  327,  328,  410,  428, 
429,  436,  443. 

his  place  in  history,  14,  15, 

18,  71,  87n. 

his  death,  14. 

his  dates,  14. 

his  purpose  in  writing  his 

history,  15  sq. 

his  fitness  as  a  historian,  17, 

18,  86,  161,  164,  428. 

his    teacher    Pamphilus   of 

Csesarea,  17. 

his  continuators,  18. 

he  knew  little  Latin,  18. 

simply  as  a  witness,  86  sq. 

his  honesty,  86,  173. 

his  Chronicle,  120. 

his   account  of   Quadratus, 

120,  121. 

his  account  of  the  Paschal 

controversy,  219  sq.,  221. 

his  account  of  the  Cathe- 
dral at  Tyre,  446. 

Euty  chins,  patriarch  of  Alexan- 
dria, 72. 

Evarestus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  32, 
33,  45. 

Everlasting  punishment,  357. 

Evodius,  predecessor  of  Ignatius 
at  Antioch,  87. 

Evolution,  a  Christian  principle, 
2. 

Exaltation  of  the  Holy  Cross.  420 n. 

Excommunication,  218,  219,  221, 
314,  315. 

Ecstasv,  used  by  the  Montanists, 
229,230. 

often  wild  raving,  231. 

Ex.  xv.  25— 51n. 

Fabian,  martyr,  363,  371,  380. 
Fabius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,  383n., 

429. 
Fasting  in    the    Early   Church, 

299,  400,  401. 
Father   in    relation    to   the   Son, 

100,  146,  250,  251,  307  sq.,  345, 

346,  424. 


Index. 


493 


Faustus,  Faustinus,  and  Fausti- 

nianus,  190. 
Felicissirnus,  deacon  at  Carthage, 

377,  390u. 
Felicitas,  martyr,  237. 

in  prison,  246. 

Ferrar,  Nicholas,  295n. 

Fidus,  bishop,  393. 

consults  on  the  sacraments, 

393. 
Firmilian,  Bishop  of  Csesarea  in 

Cappadocia,  63,358,  383n.,429. 
opposed  the  Roman  aggres- 
sion, 408,  409. 

his  death,  412. 

presided  at  Autioch  council, 

431. 

his  death,  431. 

First  cause,  the,  321. 

Fisher,  Dr.  G.  P.  467. 

Flavia     Domitilla,     probably    a 

Christian,  31. 

Neapolis,  142. 

Flavian,  layman  of  Antiocb,  54u. 
Forged  Decretals,  118. 
Forgiveness  of  sin  sacramentally, 

251,  347. 
Fortunatus,     presbyter    at    Car- 
thage, 377,  390n. 
Fronto,  heathen  philosopher,  156, 

157n.,  157. 
his    influence    against    the 

Christians,  156. 
Fructuosus,  Bishop  of  Tarragona, 

365. 
his     Christian     endurance, 

365. 

Galerius,  Emperor,  442,  444. 
Gal.  i.  19;  ii.  9— 65d. 

ii.  13— 21n. 

Gallienus,  Emperor,  366. 

proclaimed       Christianity 

"religio  licita,"  366. 
Gen.  iii.  15—240. 
General  Assembly  of  Asia,  134. 
Gibbon,  his  sneers  at  Eusebius, 

18. 
Gnosis,  knowledge  or  conscience, 

196. 


Gnosis,  to  Clement  of  Alexandria, 

327. 
Gnosticism,  7,   184  sq.,  195  sq., 

255,  271. 

its  heathen  source,  195,  250. 

rationalistic,  196  sq. 

its  Demiurge,  199  sq.,  250. 

its  ^Eons,  201  sq.,  256. 

its  Pleroma,  202. 

the  good  in  it,  204  sq.,  206, 

250,  328,  331. 

on  the  sacraments,  275,  331. 

allied  to  Manichseism,  432. 

Gnostics,  15n.,  184  sq. 

their  views   of  Christ   and 

the  Trinity,  186. 

always  Rationalistic,  196. 

— -  held  matter  as  evil,  198  sq. 
their    system   of   Scripture 

interpretation,  200. 
their  interpretation    of   the 

Incarnation,  202,  261. 
were  too  early  in  thought, 

271. 
God,    the    idea    in    Gnosticism, 

250. 

His  unity,  251,  253. 

in  Unity  and  Trinity,  319- 

may  visit  in  pestilence,  395. 

Godhead,  in  the  idea  of  Monarch- 

ianism,  251. 

terms  for  relations  in,  425. 

God's,     the     Christian     feeling 

about,  146. 
Gordian,  the  Emperor,  363. 
Gordius,    Bishop   of    Jerusalem, 

352. 
Gospels,  Versions  discovered,  vi. 
Grapte,  a  deaconess,  44. 
Greek,  the   prevailing   language 

in  Apostolic  times,  40,  158. 
at  Rome  and  north  Africa, 

158,  159. 
the  language  at  Lyons  and 

Vienne,  163. 
the  Church  and  its  influence, 

224. 

rites  and  clubs,  225,  226. 

life  and  learning  in  Alexan- 
dria, 317  sq.,  322  sq. 


494 


Index. 


Greek,  Versions  of  Symmachus, 

etc.,  338. 
Gregory,  Great,  470. 

Illuminator,  434  sq. 

story    of    his    family    and 

birth,  434. 

consecration,  435. 

his  Church,  435. 

Gregory  of  Csesarea,  426. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  429. 
Gregory  of  Tours,  166. 
Gregory  Thaum,  339, 426  sq.,  439. 
story     of    bis     wonderful 

works,  427  sq.,  439. 

bis  writings,  429. 

friend  of  Origen,  429. 

was  the  council  at  Antioch, 

431. 
learned   from   Origen,   340, 

426. 

Hadrian,  the  Emperor,  86. 

built  a  new  city  at  Jeru- 
salem, 113,  114,  179. 

witnessed    an     advance    in 

Christianity,  118. 

life     under    him    pictured, 

126-28. 

his  rescript,  129,  154,  158. 

— —  his  policy,  130,  154. 

Hagg.  ii.  9 — 24u. 

Hardy, E.  G.,  oxford  scholar,  105, 
106  sq.,  463u. 

Harnack,  Prof.,  30,  49,  95. 

Haroun  al  Raschid,  420. 

Hatch,  his  views  on  church  gov- 
ernment, 75  sq.,  95,  377n. 

Heathen  rites  and  ceremonies  not 
attended  by  Christians,  108, 
109,  150. 

men  and  their  ways  severely 

viewed,  109. 

superstitions,  114. 

unprepared     for    Christian 

thought,  145. 

shrines  and  worship,  147n., 

150. 

dissatisfied  with  heathen- 
ism, 175sq. 

their  misconceptions,  395. 


Hebrew,  study  of,  337. 
Heb.  i.  2—201. 

vi.  1,  2—459. 

vi.  4-8;  x.  26-29—298. 

viii.  3—460. 

xiii.7,  17,  24—38. 

Helenus,  bishop  of  Tarsus,  383n., 

431. 
presided    at    a    council    in 

Antioch,  431. 
Heraclas,  bishop  of  Alexandria, 

357,  369 n.,  422. 
Herbert,  George,  295n. 
Heresies,  from  the  church's  ri- 
vals, 175  sq. 
attempted        explanations, 

249,  250. 

in  Tertullian's  day,  288  sq. 

Heresy   and   heretic,    ambiguity 

in  the  terms,  405,  406. 
Historical  evolution,  a  great  fact, 

2. 
Holy  Ghost  as  the  Word  of  God, 

152n. 
the  montanistie  fancy,  228, 

229. 

our  spiritual  life,  268. 

Holy  Scriptures,  the   Canon  of, 

468,  469. 

read  in  worship,  470. 

Homo  ousios,  433. 

its  force  and  use,  433,  434. 

Hooker,  Richard,  295n.,  467n. 
Hymenseus,  bishop  of  Jerusalem, 

431. 
Hypostasis  and  substantia,  425. 

Ignatius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  36, 

37,  46  sq.,  68,  87,  137,  466. 

his  Epistles,  46  sq.,  99  sq. 

his  martyrdom,  46,  47,  48, 

49,  68. 
genuineness  of  the  Epistles 

questioned,  48,  458n. 

Epistles  in  two  editions,  48. 

his  life  obscure,  49. 

his  dates,  49,  68. 

his  character,  49,  50,  51,  259. 

his    characteristic   sayings, 

52,  68,  266. 


Index. 


495 


Ignatius,   his   illustrations  from 
medical  practice,  52,  53. 

those  from  music,  53. 

his  passion  for  martyrdom, 

54  sq. 

anxious  for  church   unity, 

55  sq.,103. 

on      church     government, 

68sq.,94,  99,  101  sq.,  447. 
denounced  the  Gnostics,  203, 

204. 
his  position  criticised,  447 

sq. 
Illumination  as  Baptism,  458. 
Incarnation  as  a  doctrine,  8,  175, 

261,  267,  268,  275. 

the  root  of  all  history,  16u. 

Independency,  447,  450,  451. 
Infant  salvation,  269. 
Inspiration  as  a  Christian  force, 

78,  91. 
Interpretation,  Gnostic,  200. 

by  Gnostic  Pairs,  201. 

Invocation,  the  Eucharistic,  474, 

480. 
Irenreus,  his  life  and  dates,  258, 

334. 
his  place  in  church  life,  258, 

259,  260,  276,  290. 

his  writings,  260,  261. 

on  the  heresies,  261,  290. 

on  the  value   of  tradition, 

263  sq.,  277. 
on  the  going  to  Rome,  266. 

267. 

on  Gnosticism,  266  sq.,  334. 

on    the  Eucharist,  270  sq., 

276,  461,  462. 

his  conservatism,  276,  277. 

on  the  resurrection,  277. 

on  Chiliasm,  423. 

as  an  authoritv,  33,  42,  45, 

46,  70,  87,  88,  114,  132,    222, 

278,  328. 
pupil    and  friend  of   Polv- 

carp,  133,  258. 
on    the    Paschal    question, 

222,  223. 
Irenarch,  Roman  official,  137. 
lea.  i.  16-20—149. 


Isa.  xl.  12;  xlix.17;  lxvi.  1—23, 

24. 
xlii.  1  ;  xliii.  10  ;  xlix.  5,  6  ; 

liii.  11— 29n. 

James,    the    Lord's  brother  an 

apostle,  65,  191. 
first  bishop   at   Jerusalem, 

86,  192. 

as  apostolic  leader,  192. 

Jerome,  as  an  authority,  19,  180, 

337. 
his  views  upon  church  gov- 
ernment, 71,  72,  73. 
his    scripture     translation. 

183,  337. 

on  Origen's  ordination,  356. 

Jerusalem,  its  early  Bishops,  86, 

350  sq. 
Jesus  and  Joshua,  464u. 
Jews,  their  early  call,  6. 
the   feeling    against    them, 

23. 

their  sacrificial  system,  98. 

their  hatred   of  Christians, 

139. 

what  they  longed  for,  175  sq. 

their  Passover,  209,  210. 

in  Alexandria,  317  sq. 

Jocundus,  martyr,  243. 

John,  Baptist,  the  Ascetic,  437, 

440. 
John  the  Evangelist,    wore   the 

petalon,  220. 

in  his  visions,  230. 

reference     to     the     Logos, 

321  sq. 
John  the  Evangelist,  his  death 

and  age,  3,  350. 

his  allusion  to  Caius,  35. 

could  not  settle  the  troubles 

at  Corinth,  36. 

banished  by  Domitian,  114. 

his  keeping  of  Easter,  210, 

216. 
John  iii.  5 — 454. 
— -  vii.  5— 65n . 

vii.  39—455. 

—  viii.  57—269. 
xiii.  10—297. 


496 


Index. 


John  xiv.  16,  26—165. 

xiv.  28—346. 

xx.  20,  23—78. 

1  John  ii.  1—165. 

2  John  7—203. 
Josephus,  97. 

used  the  language  of  a  Jew, 

97,  98. 
Judaism,  a  danger  to  the  Chris- 
tian church,  6. 
Julia  Mamsea,  339,  353,  361. 
Julius  Africanus,  345. 
Justin     Martyr,    the    apologist, 

141  sq.,  270,  325. 
his    birthplace    and  family 

connection,  142,  454. 
his  education  and  training, 

142,  143. 

his  conversion,  143. 

bis  apologies  two,  144. 

appealed    to   prophecy   and 

chauge  of  life,  149. 

his  other  writings,  155. 

his  death  and  dates,  156. 

on  the  Eucharist,  275,  277, 

466,  470. 

Kansas'  Prohibitory  Law,  llln. 
Kenoma,  as  applied  to  the  world, 

203. 
Kiss  of  Peace  in  the  Eucharist, 

244n.,  248,  475. 
Knowledge,    as   viewed    by   the 

Gnostics,  198  sq. 
Knox,  John,  298,  467n. 

Labarum,  account  of  Constan- 
tino's, 445. 

Lactantuis,  "the  Christian  Cic- 
ero," 157,  441. 

his  writings,  441. 

Lapsi,  and  how  to  be  dealt 
with,  189,  372  sq. 

Latin  language  in  its  Christian 
use,  158. 

Laud,  Archbishop,  415. 

Law,  the  Roman  against  the 
Christian  conscience,  110,  111, 
112. 


Law,  the  Kansas  law  against  in- 
temperance, llln.,  112. 
Lawrence,  martyred,  365. 
Leonidas,  Christian  martyr,  335. 
Leontius,  bishop  of  Csesarea,  435. 
Libellatici,  373,  378. 
Licinius,  Emperor,  446. 
Lightfoot,  referred  to,  14,  30,  39, 

50,  65,  129,   138n.,  157m,  184, 

213n.,  305,  315n. 
on  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas, 

25. 
his    work    upon     Ignatius' 

Epistles,  48. 
differed  from  by  our  author, 

53. 
on   the  Christian  ministry, 

65,  73,  97,  103. 

on  the  Essenes,  184. 

Liturgical  ceremonies,  480,  481, 

482. 
Liturgy,  27. 

in  ancient  times,  470. 

ancient  forms,  471,  472. 

the  modern,  472,  480,  481. 

described  in  detail,  472. 

Logos  in  theology,  321,  329. 

Lord's  Day,  466,  467. 

Lord's  Prayer  used  for  Euchar- 

istic  consecration,  479. 
Lord's    Supper,    not    an     early 

name,  27. 
Lucius,  Christian  Martyr,  155. 
Lucius,  bishop  of  Rome,  399. 
Luke  vi.  16—16. 
Luther,  Martin,  50,  284,  467n. 
Lyons  and  Vienne,  the  martyrs 

of,  163  sq. 

Macrianus,    usurping    Emperor, 

366,  422. 
Macrinus,  Emperor,  361. 
Magnus,  layman,  393. 
Mai.  i.  11—460. 
Malchion,  presbyter  of  Autioch, 

431. 
Mani,  Persian,  432,  436. 

"the  Maniac,"  436. 

Manichseism,  435  sq. 

its  Eastern  origin,  435. 


Index. 


497 


Manicbaeisni   allied    to   Gnostic- 
ism, 435,  436. 

allured  St.  Augustine,  436. 

its    mediaeval  development, 

436. 
Marcellinus,  first  pope  of  Rome, 

369n. 
Marcia,  concubine  of  Conimodus, 

173,  312. 
Marcian,    bishop  of  Artes,  401, 

402. 
Marcion,  heretical    bishop,    205, 

206,  275. 
Marcosians,  heretics,  156. 
Marcus  Aurelius,  Emperor,  131, 

144,  146n.,  160,  162,  163,  363. 

his  reign,  156,  157n. 

his  severity  to   Christians, 

156,  163,  167. 
Marcus,  a  philosopher,  132. 
Marcus  Minucius  Felix,  156,  157. 

occasion  of  his  Octavius,  156. 

borrowed    from   Tertullian, 

156n. 
account  of  the  Octavius,  157, 

158,  159. 
Mark  iii.  16-19—64. 
Marriage,    disinclination   to,    by 

the  Christians,  107. 
as    treated    by    Tertullian, 

301. 

second,  302,  303. 

its  defence  by  Clement,  330. 

for  the  clergy,  432. 

Martial,  bishop  of  Merida,  400. 
Martyrdom,  under  Decius,  363  sq. 

under  Diocletian,  442  sq. 

Martyrdom,  a  passion  for  it,  54, 

55,  56,  159,  160,  167,  335,  376, 

397. 

of  Polycarp,  132  sq. 

the  birthday  of,  140. 

its  nobility,  159, 167.  397. 

at   Lyons  and  Vienne,  163 

sq.,  233,  259. 
as  witness-bearing,  167, 168, 

170,  236,  237,  413. 

as  proof  of  obstinacy,  169. 

the  "Frenzy  of  Caracalla," 

350. 


Mason,  Dr.,  458n. 

Matter,    regarded  as  evil  by  the 

Gnostics,  198  sq. 
Matt.  x.  2-4—64. 

x.  10—336. 

x.  36—136. 

x.  40—91. 

xxv.  31-46—278. 

xxviii.  18-20—78. 

Matthias  selected  as  a  fit  leader, 

2. 

called  an  apostle,  65. 

Maurus  Rabanus,  297. 
Maxentius,  Emperor,  444. 
Maximian,  Emperor,  442,  444. 
Maximilla,  Montanist,  228,  232. 

perhaps  a  suicide,  232u. 

Maximin,    Emperor,    358,    362, 

444. 
Maximus,  bishop  of  Alexandria, 

432. 
Maximus,  bishop  of  Bostra,  431. 
McGiffert's  translation  ofEuse- 

bius'  History,  15n.,  214,  358 n. 
his  view  of  Church  govern- 
ment, 81  sq. 
teaching  of  his  Apostolic  Age, 

81,  95n. 
his   theories  unsatisfactory, 

82. 
his  treatment  of  the  Acts  of 

the  apostles,  83. 
Melancthon  on  Ecclesiastical  pol- 
ity, 67n. 
Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  and  his 

Apology,  161,  214,  220. 
wrote  books  on  the  Pascha, 

214. 

his  books  are  lost,  215. 

Methodius  of  Tyre,  bishop  of  Pa- 

tara,  440. 
a   voluminous   writer,    440, 

441. 

opposed  Origen's  teaching, 

440. 
Millenariaism,  453. 
Millennium    and    Chiliasm,  423, 

453. 
Milman,  Dean,  quoted,  40,  313. 
Miltiades,  Christian  writer,  161, 


498 


Index. 


Ministry,  its  orders  essential  to 

unity,  55,  56. 
its  threefold  character,    61 

sq.,  98,  100. 
Minucius  Fundanus,  154,  158. 
Minucius  (Marcus  Felix)  his  Oc- 

tavius,  157  sq. 
Missa  Catechumenorum,  472n. 
Miracles  believed   in  by   Justin 

Martyr,  148. 
were    appealed    to    by   the 

apologists,  148. 

Christ  accepted,  148. 

post  apostolic  ones,  351. 

Missions  in  the  Church,  434  sq. 
Mommsen,  German  scholar,  105, 

106,  129. 
Monarchianism,  248  sq.,  307  sq., 

431. 
its    purpose  and  principle, 

249  sq. 

a  false  form  of,  252. 

controversy  upon,  307    q. 

Monarchical  Episcopacy,  33,  68. 

Monasticism,  437  sq. 

how  related  to  Manichaeism, 

437. 
its  principle  considered,  437, 

438. 
Montanism,    208,   228,    229,   292 

sq. 

the  controversy,  224, 292  sq. 

its  principles,  228,  292. 

its    ecstasies   and  prophet- 
esses, 229. 
its    reputed    inconsistency, 

232. 
its  weakness,  232,  233,  245, 

254,  257,  294. 
had  a  noble  and  holy  follow- 
ing, 233,  245,  303. 
its    leaders  honest  self-de- 
ceivers, 233,  245,  259,  303. 
wanted  Catholic  recognition, 

233,  260,  303. 

its  home  in  Phrygia,  235. 

stamped  out  by  Justinian, 

235. 
■ followed  by  Tertullian,  235, 

292  sq. 


Montanism,  separated  from  the 

Church,  236,  245. 
an    unhealthy    movement, 

249,  254,  303. 
Montanist  Martyrs,  237  sq. 

baptism  disallowed,  410. 

Montanus,    the    Phrygian,    224, 

227,  231n. 

his  preaching,  227,  231n. 

perhaps  a  suicide,  232n. 

Mosaic    system    in    relation   to 

Christianity,  178  sq. 
Moses  as  a  Mystic,  22. 
favorite  with  the  Essenes, 

186. 
Mucius  Scsevola,  160. 
31uratorian  Fragment,  45. 
Mystical  Divine  Supper,  27n. 
Mystical  Divine  Table,  27n. 
Mystical  Supper  used  by  Diony  sius 

of  Alexandria,  27. 
Mysticism,  when  Gnostic,  200. 

Naasenes,  heretics,  196,  199. 

Gnostics,  199. 

Namphamo,  martyr,  237. 

Narcissus,  bishop  of  Jerusalem, 
350,  351,  428. 

a     witness     of     Christian 

thought,  351. 

covered  by  Romance,    351, 

352. 

Natalius,  bishop,  252. 

Nature  and  Personality,  346. 

Nazarenes,  or  Christians,  178.    • 

forming    a    narrower    sect, 

179,  180,  181,  435. 

called  later,  Mandaeans,  435. 

Negro  as  a  parallel  to  the  Phry- 
gian, 226. 

Nemesion,  martyr,  364. 

Nepos,  bishop,  424. 

Nero,  his  motive  in  persecuting 
the  Christians,  105. 

the  character  of  the  persecu- 
tion, 110. 

Nerva  the  Emperor,  114. 

Nestorian  heresy,  472. 

Nicaea,  the  first  council  of,  4, 219, 
223,  297,  384n. 


Index. 


499 


Nicsea,  condemned  heretical  bap- 
tisms, 413. 
Nicetes,  father  of  Herod  the  Iren- 

arcb,  137,  140. 
Nicolaitanes,  205. 
Nicolas,  a  Gnostic,  205. 
Noetus,    a    Sabellian,   254,    255, 

256,  301. 
Novatian,    presbyter,    371,    376, 

377,  379. 

appeals  to  Cyprian,  379. 

made  a  rival  bishop,  380  sq., 

400,  429. 

his    character,    380,  382. 

Novatians  and  the  schism,  382  sq. 
connected   with   the  rebap- 

tisms,  403  sq. 
Novatianist,  382  sq.,  401. 
Novatus,  presbyter,  377. 
in  the  Decian  persecution, 

377. 

in  the  Roman  schism,  381  sq. 

Novatus,  schismatic,  315n. 

Octavius,  a  Christian  in  contro- 
versy, 157. 

Octavius  of  Marcus  Minutius.  de- 
scribed, 159. 

Offering  made  by  the  presbyter  to 
God,  95n.,  96. 

Onesimus,  Bishop  of  Ephesus,  47. 

Ophites,  heretics,  196. 

Gnostics,  199. 

Optatus,  Bishop,  244,  247. 

Ordination,  its  rules,  355,  356, 
362. 

Oriental  Churches  and  Old  Style, 
224. 

Origeu,  on  Eschatology,  348,  349. 

his   later  life,    349  sq.,  361, 

426. 

his  lay  preaching,  353. 

head    of    the    Alexandrian 

school,  354. 

took  holy  orders,  355. 

his  ordination  resented,  355, 

356. 

on  Everlasting  Punish- 
ment, 357  sq. 

as  a  heretic,  357. 


Origen,    his   school   at  Csesarea, 

358. 

his  visit  to  Achaia,  358n. 

his    death    and    mourning, 

358,  359. 
correspondent    of   Gordian, 

363. 

his  allegorism,  424,  452. 

on  the  Eucharist,  463. 

19,  42,  334  sq.,  353. 

his  early  training,  334,  335. 

his  desire  for  martyrdom, 

335. 

opposed  Gnosticism,  336. 

his  asceticism,  336. 

his  love   of   learning,    337, 

338,  339,  452. 
his  Scripture   studies,  337, 

338,  339,  344  sq. 
his    Hexapla   and    Tetrapla, 

338n.,  339. 
his  opinions  and  writings, 

340  sq.,  424,  452,  453. 

on  Catholicity,  340,  341. 

on  the  sacramental  system, 

341,  342,  343. 

on  theology,  345,  424. 

Overseer    as    the    equivalent    of 

Bishop,  73  sq.,80. 
Oxford  school  on  the  sacraments, 

270. 

Pamphilus,  presbyter  of  Csesarea 
and  teacher  of  Eusebius,  17. 

Pantsenus,  presbyter,  324,  325, 
353. 

his  writings,  324. 

his  pupil  Clement,  325. 

Pantheism  in  Phrygia,  224  sq. 

Papacy  as  a  human  invention,  67, 
219. 

Mediaeval,  118. 

Papias,  his  lost  writings,  59  sq., 
278. 

bishop  of  Hierapolis,  59,  278. 

a  chiliast,  59. 

Papirius,  in  the  Paschal  contro- 
versy, 220. 

Paraclete,  the  Comforter  and 
Advocate,  165n. 


500 


Index. 


Paraclete,  its  Montanistic  phase, 

228. 
Parish,  its  ancient  and  modern 

definitions,  15u. 
Parties  strong  and  active  in  the 

early  church,  34  sq.,  35,  36. 
a  clerical  party  on  the  side 

of  Authority,  36,  37. 
Pascha  Anastasimon,  Easter,  214n. 
Staurosimon,   Good   Friday, 

214. 
Paschal  Controversy  208  sq. 
season   and   its    ceremonies, 

297. 
Passover,   the  time  for  its  Chris- 
tian observance,  209  sq. 

as  a  Jewish  feast,  209  sq. 

practical   settlement  of  the 

question,  223. 
Patripassianism,  248,  254,  307  sq. 
Paul,    selected  as    a   fit  leader, 

192,  269. 

his  martyrdom,  3. 

a  Christian  Mystic,  22,  189o. 

called  an  Apostle,  65,  69,  91. 

his    want   of   Authority  at 

Corinth,  78,  189. 
as  not  writing  Timothy  and 

Titus,  80,  83. 
appealed  to  by  the  Gnostics, 

203. 

on  dress,  298,  299. 

in  Phrygia,  227. 

Paul  of  Samosata,  430. 

his  life  and  character,  430. 

friend  of  Zenobia,  430. 

charges    against,    430,    431, 

432. 
■  condemned    and    deposed, 

431. 

his  election  irregular,  432. 

his     position    and    actions, 

432  sq. 
Paulianists  condemned,  413. 
Penitence,  forgiveness  on,  309  sq. 
Penitents,  to  be  dealt  with,  297, 

298,  309  sq.,  375  sq. 
Perfect,  a  title  of  Christians,  264. 
Periods    in    the    Post  Apostolic 

Age,  174. 


Perpetua  and  Felicitas,  martyrs, 

237  sq. 
Persecution    by    the    Emperors, 

105  sq.,  214,  360  sq.,  442  sq. 

details  of,  114  sq.,  442  sq. 

uuder  Decius,  363 sq., 371  sq. 

causing  apostasies,  371  sq. 

Person,  question  upon  the  term, 

253,  346. 
Personality,  and  nature,  346. 
Pestilences,  393,  394. 
God's  visitations,  395,  397, 

398. 
IPet.  ii.  24— 51n. 

iv.  15— 409n. 

v.  1—71. 

v.  5—82. 

Petalon,  on  the  mitre,  220n. 

Peter,  as  an  Apostle,  69. 

his    relation    to    the   other 

Apostles,  191,  192. 
his  ecclesiastical  leadership, 

192. 
Peter,  as  the  church  foundation, 

388,  389,  408. 
Philip,    the    Arabian     Emperor, 

339,  363. 
correspondent    of     Origen, 

363. 
Philip,  the  Evangelist,  120n. 

two  bearing  the  name,  120a. 

Philip,  of  Side,  324. 

Philip,  of  Tralles,  Asiarch,  134. 

Philippi,    supposed    change    of 

Ministry,  79. 
Philo,  the  Jew,  320  sq. 

his  speculations,  320  sq. 

Philosophy    and    theology,    328, 

329. 
Philostorgius,  the  historian,  18. 
Philotheos,   Bryennios    finder  of 

the  Didache,  25,  26. 
Phoenix,  story  of  told  by  Clem- 
ent, 39. 
Phrygian  race,  225,  226. 
their  religious  affinities,  225, 

226. 

extent  of  the  province,  225n. 

had    an    degraded    people, 

226. 


Index. 


501 


Phrygian,   course    of    Christian- 
ity in,  227. 

Moutanism,  232,  235. 

Pins,  Bishop  of  Rome,  32,  45,  88. 

his  date,  45. 

a  brother  of  Hernias,  45,  46. 

Pionius,  of  Smyrna,  Martyr,  363. 
Plague,  and  pestilence,  394. 
Plato,his  philosophizing,  8n.,320. 
Platonism,  320  sq,  326. 
Pliny,  the  Roman  governor,  54. 
his      correspondence     with 

Trajan,  114,  115-18. 
Polybius,  Bishop  of  Tralles,  47. 
Polycart,  Bishop  of  Smyrna,  47, 

49,  58,114,  134,  163,206,212. 
his  letter  from  Ignatius,  47, 

58. 
his  letter  to  the  Philippians, 

58,  79. 
his  martyrdom,  58,  59,  132 

sq.,  214,  228. 
Polycart,  pupil  and  friend  of  St. 

John,  132. 
question    of    his   age,    137, 

212u. 
his  interest  in  Easter  observ- 
ance, 212,  213n.,  214,  220. 
Polycrates,    bishop   of    Ephesus, 

writes  to  Victor,  219. 
Polyeuctus,  Martyr,  363. 
Pontianns,  Bishop  of  Rome.  362. 
Pontius,  Martyr  at  fifteen,  169. 
Pontius,    Cyprian's    biographer, 

368,  394,  395. 
Poor,  a  favorite  Christian  idea, 

177. 
Pope,    real    force    of   the   word, 

369n. 

modern  view  of,  xi.,  xii. 

Popular     feelings     against    the 

Christians,  107,  113. 

its  danger,  113. 

Post  Apostolic  Age,  its  period,  1, 

3,  297. 

propriety  of  the  Name,  1. 

questions  in  it  to  be  settled 

6,  297,  447  sq. 
its   enormous  task,   6,   7,  8, 

297. 


its  authors,  18  sq. 

if  "the  Angel  of  the  church 

at  Smyrna,"  133n. 

Periods     of     history,    174, 

175  sq. 

its  organizing,  447  sq. 

Post  reformation  thought,  11,  67. 

ideas  on  church  govern- 
ment, 67  sq. 

Pothinus.  Bishop  of  Lyons,  163, 
170,  259. 

his  martyrdom,  170. 

Prayer,  standing  at,  296. 

Praxeas,  confessor,  256,  257,  289, 
308. 

bis  influence  at  Rome,  257. 

■  if  Patripassianist,  257,  308. 

Pressense  quoted,  viii. 

Presbyter,  having  different  mean- 
ings, 70,  82,  95. 

his  offices,  70,  82,  95. 

as    true    successor    to    the 

apostolate,  101. 

Presbyterate,  as  developed  into 
the  Episcopate,  73,  74,  75,  76, 
82. 

Priesthood,  as  a  Christian  idea, 
464,  465. 

Primtive  Church,  its  corrup- 
tion, 9. 

Priscilla,  Montanist,  228,  232. 

Priscus,  father  of  Justin 
Martyr,  142. 

Privatus,  Bishop,  378. 

Proculus,  a  Christian,  360. 

Prophecy  as  a  Christian  force, 
78,  81. 

appealed  to  by  the  apolo- 
gists, 148,  149. 

Prophets,  in  the  early  church, 
29  sq.,  81,  89,  227. 

as  under  the  spirit,  230 

Prov.  viii.  22,  23—322. 

xvi.  6—399. 

Psychics,  of  Tertullian,  293,  294. 

Ps.  xxxi.  22;  cxvi.  11—230. 

xxxiv.  8—240. 

xcvi.  5 — 146. 

Ptolemseus,  Christian  martyr, 
154. 


502 


Index. 


Ptolemy  Philadelphia,  318. 
Publius      Bishop      of     Athens, 

martyred,  132. 
Pudeus,  martyr,  247. 
Puller,  Primitive  Saints ,267n. 
Purgatory,  242,  468. 
Puritan    teaching    and    temper, 

294,  295,  309  sq.,  446n. 
party   at  Carthage,  382  sq., 

446n. 
Pusey,  Dr.,  357. 

Quadratus,  his  Apology,  120. 
the   little    known   of   him, 

120,  121. 
account  given  by  Eusebius. 

121. 
the     father     of    historical 

method,  121. 
his  testimony  to  the  Saviour, 

121. 
Quarto-Deciman       Controversy, 

209  sq.,  216,  223,  224,  255,  259. 
Quintus,  martyr,  243. 
Quintus,  Bishop   in  Mauretania, 

407. 
Ramsay,  Prof.,  as  authority  upon 

The    Church   and  Empire,    105 

sq.,  225n. 
Rationalism,  as  against  Tradition- 
alism, 196,  197. 
Rebaptism,      controversy     over, 

403  sq.,  408. 
Reformation,  view  upon  Episco- 
pacy, 67n. 

serious  question  upon, 

Regeneration,    in    baptism,   149, 

150,  454. 
Regulus,  160. 
Relics  of  Polycarp,  140. 
Resurrection,  and  the  Millennium, 

423. 
as  part  of  the  Catholic  Faith, 

452. 

of  the  body,  452. 

as  connected  with  baptism, 

456,  457. 
Rev.  i.,  ii.,  iii.  66. 

i.  14—240. 

ii.  2—65. 


Rev.  ii.  6,  15—205. 

ii.  10— 133n. 

xx.  4-6—277. 

Revelation,  its  amount  and  value, 
208,  322. 

the  montanistic,  228. 

Reville,Les  Origines  de  V  Episcopal, 
77,  78,  79. 

his  views  stated,  77,  78,  79. 

his  poor  arguments,  79n. 

Revocatus,  martyr,  237,  247. 

Roman  Empire,  442. 

Roman  Emperors  toward  Chris- 
tianity, 105  sq.,  360  sq. 

their  plea  and  law,  106  sq. 

made  objects  of   worship, 

115u. 

Roman  Church  quarrels  with  the 
East,  218  sq.,  233. 

her    claims    to   authority, 

265,  266,  402. 

as  a  place  for  appeals,  266, 

402. 
her  pope,  267, 

her      transubstantiation, 

271  sq. 

her  explanations  and  addi- 
tions, 292. 

two  bishops  charged  with 

heresy,  316. 

her  unity,  386,  387. 

on  the  Petrine  foundation, 

387  sq.,  408. 

aggression  opposed,  408. 

Rom.  xvi.  23—35. 

xvi.  7 — 65. 

Rome,  list  of  its  early  bishops, 
32,  33,  45,  87,  195,  419. 

and  Carthage  resumed  peace- 
ful relations,  414. 

Russians  observe  Old  Style,  224. 

Rusticus,  Roman  magistrate,  156. 

Sabbath    question,   25,  465,  466, 

467,  468,  469. 
Sabellianism,   its    purpose,    249, 

254,  308  sq.,  345,  424. 
Sabellius,  257,  308. 
Sabinns,  bishop  of  Leon,  400. 
Sacrificati,  373. 


Index. 


503 


Sacrifice,    as    a    Christian   idea, 

459  sq. 
Sagaris,  bishop  and  martyr,  220. 
Salmon,   Dr.,  26,   30,  42,  45,  46, 

157nM  236. 
Salvum  latum,  247n. 
Sauctus,  martyr,  168. 
Sapor,  Persian  King,  366,  394. 
Saturninus,  martyr,  243. 

heretic,  196. 

Saturus,  martyr,  239n.,  242,244m, 

246,  247,  243. 
his  visions  of  Paradise,  242, 

243  sq. 
Schaff,  Dr.,  46,  236. 
his  views  upon  Episcopacy, 

68,  70,  73. 
Scholarship,  advancing,  v.  sq. 
Scillitan  Martyrs,  237. 
Scripture,  Gnostic  systems  of  in- 
terpretation, 200. 
the  Septuagint  version,  318, 

319. 

translations  of,  183. 

Sennen,  martyr,  364. 
Septimius,  Emperor,  360. 
Septuagint,  183,  318,  338. 
Service,  daily,  469,  470. 

weekly,  470  sq. 

Sestertius,  its  value,  393n. 
Severus    (Alexander),    173,   339, 

361,  362,  444. 
(Lucius    Septimius),    173, 

237,  326. 
Silas,  called  an  Apostle,  65. 
Simon  Magus,  191,  195n.,  261. 
reappears  in  German  story, 

195. 
Slaves,  often  educated,  32. 
Socrates,  the  historian,  18. 
Sozomen,  the  historian,  18. 
Spirit,  the  Holy  Spirit,  186  sq. 
his  place  in  theology,  186, 

187,  228,  229,  268. 
Spirituals  of  Tertullian,  293,  294. 
Stations,    in    Tertullian's    time, 

299. 
Statius,     Quadratus,     proconsul, 

134. 
Stephen,  bishop  of  Rome,  399. 


Stephen,  his  disputes  with  Cy- 
prian, 399  sq. 

his  real  position,  407,  408, 

413. 

accused  of  aggressions,  408, 

409. 

his  death   and   its  results, 

413,  414. 

Substance  and  Person,  425. 
Sunday  observance  discussed,  6n., 
152,  210,  211. 

its  forms  of  service,  152. 

■  its  observances,  153,  211. 

the  reasons  for  its  special 

observance,  153. 

the  day  for  Easter,  210,  211. 

the  weekly  feast  of  resurrec- 
tion, 211. 

Superintendence  of  churches  in 
early  times,  66. 

Symeon,  son  of  Clopas,  bishop 
of  Jerusalem,  86. 

Symmachus,  Ebioiiite  and  trans- 
lator, 183. 

his  Version,  338. 

Tacitus,  the  historian,  105. 

Tatian,  the  Assyrian,  160. 

his  works,  160,  160u. 

Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  vi. 
25  sq.,  70,  476,  481. 

its  discovery  and  condition, 

25,  26. 

its  contents,  26. 

its  date,  29,  30. 

its  tone  and  teaching,  27  sq., 

70,  89  sq. 

Te  Deum,  origin  of  its  phrases, 
397n. 

Telesphorus,  a  Martyr,  131. 

Temple,  as  spiritualized  by  Barna- 
bas, 24  sq. 

Tertullian  on  fasting,  299  sq. 

on     Christian     marriage, 

301  sq. 

Tertullian,  account  of,  279  sq. 

his  new  theological  terms, 

280,  284. 

his  training,  280  sq. 

his  writings,  283  sq. 


504 


Index. 


Tertullian,  his  dates,  282. 

his  apologetics,  285  sq. 

as  a  controversialist,  288  sq. 

against  the  heretics,  289. 

as  a  witness,  108. 

his  lauguagein  writing,  159. 

a  montanist,  209,  235,  236, 

256.  292  sq. 
on  the  Eucharist,  271,  275. 

his      practical      writings, 

292  sq.,  295  sq. 

his    progress    of    thought, 

293  sq. 

on  penitents,  297. 

on  women's  dress,  298. 

his  views  on   baptism,  404, 

405,  457. 
on  the  Intermediate  State, 

468. 
Tertullianists,  at  Carthage,  236u. 
Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs, 

179. 
Theoctistus,   bishop  of  Csesarea, 

353,  355,  383n. 
Theodoret,     the     historian,     18, 

54u.,  63. 
Theodotion,  his  Version,  338. 
Theodotus,  of  Byzantium,    252, 

431. 
Theodotus,  banker,  252. 
Theology,  its  era  of  evolution,  8, 

11. 
Theophilus,  bishop  Antioch  and 

his  writings,  161. 
first  to  mention"  Trinity  "as 

a  word,  161. 
Theoteonus,    bishop  of  Csesarea, 

431. 

1  Thess.  i.  1— 65n. 
v.  12—38. 

2  Thess. 

1  Tim.  iii.  1—63. 

iii.  2—77. 

iv.  12—75. 

v.  17—38,  77. 

Thraseas,  bishop  and  martyr,  220. 
1  Tim.  i.  17—201. 
Tiri dates,  son  of  Chosroes,  424. 
Tradition,  the  witness  to  truth, 
263,  264,  265. 


Traditor,  his  position,  446u. 
Trajan,  the  Emperor,  3,  188. 

his     correspondence     with 

.  Pliny,  114,  115-18. 

his    edict     regarding     the 

Christians,  117. 

his  policy  as  compared  with 

Hadrian's,  130. 

Trinity,  the  doctrine  authorized, 
8,  251,  267,  268. 

controversy  on  the  Doctrine, 

208,  251  sq. 

Modal  Trinity,  257. 

Thunderiug  Legion,  story  of  the, 
161,  162. 

TJmrificati,  373. 

Titus  Flavius  Clemens,  probably 
a  Christian,  31. 

Titus,  the  Emperor,  at  Jeru- 
salem, 113. 

Unction,  at  baptism,  455. 
Unity,  essential  in  the  Church, 

34  sq.,  55  sq. 
modern  thoughts  of  it,  viii., 

58. 

in  the  Godhead,  251. 

in  the  Episcopate,  386  sq. 

tendency  toward  Christian, 

viii. 
Urbicus,  city  prefect,  154. 
Ursula,  St.,  and  her  Virgins,  363. 

Valens,  presbyter,  58. 
Valentinians,  heretics,  196,  261. 
Valentinus,  heretic,  202. 
Valerian,  Emperor,  366,  414,  423. 
Verus,  his  reign,  157n. 
Vettius,  Epagathus,  young  man 

in  Gaul,  165. 
Vicarious,  ordination,  63. 
Victor,  a  Roman  bishop,  158. 
Victor,  Bishop  of  Rome,  218,  255, 

256,  259,  305,  306. 

threatened  to  excommuni- 
cate, 218,  219. 

in  the  Paschal  controversy, 

218,  219,  259. 

excommunicated,  the  Asiat- 
ics, 221,  222. 


Index. 


505 


Vigellius,  Saturninns,  proconsul, 

237. 
Virgins  and  their  dress,  370. 
Vulgate,  183. 

Wakeinan,     writer     of   history, 

287n. 
Waldenses,  177n. 
Warren,  Rev.  F.  E.,  482. 
Week,  days  of  the,  153,  153n. 
Wesley  an,  Methodism  and  Mon- 

tanism,  236. 
Westcott,  referred  to,  14,  40. 
Worship,    its    idea   elevated  by 

Christianity,  146n.,  469. 
considered    as    daily    and 

weekly,  469  sq. 
Worshipped,  as  applied  to  God  by 

the  Jews,  23n. 


Xavier,  Francis,  49. 

Xystus,    bishop  of  Rome,    365, 

409,  444. 
beheaded,  416. 


Zephyrinus,  bishop  of  Rome, 
255,  256,  257,  304,  306,  349. 

toward      monarchianism, 

307  sq. 

on     post- baptismal     sin, 

309  sq. 

meets  Origen,  349. 

Zahn,  German  scholar,  42,  50. 

Zeuobia,  queen  of  Palmyra,  430, 
432. 

Zwinglianism  and  the  sacra- 
ments, 270,  273. 


BRITTLE 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 


931.6 

W51 


pctfsm 


BOUND 

JUN1S19G1 


